The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) issued a ruling on June 14, 2022, in a case involving Aris Football Club and the late Theodoros Karypidis against the Hellenic Football Federation (HFF). The dispute centered on allegations of forgery and falsification related to a player’s residence permit application, which led to disciplinary sanctions by the HFF. The CAS panel, composed of Mrs. Anna Bordiugova, Mr. Michele Bernasconi, and Mr. Patrick Grandjean, addressed key legal principles, including de novo review, standing to sue, personal disciplinary liability, complicity under Greek criminal law, and the standard of proof. The panel emphasized that de novo review allows for a fresh examination of the case, though evidence exclusion should be cautious. Standing to sue requires a concrete and personal interest, which must persist until the decision is issued. Disciplinary liability is strictly personal, meaning sanctions cannot extend to deceased individuals or their heirs.
The case involved a North Macedonian player who signed an unregistered employment contract with Aris FC in 2018. The player later submitted a forged HFF certificate to Greek authorities to obtain a residence permit as an "Athlete." The HFF discovered inconsistencies and sanctioned the player, Aris FC, and its president for forgery and complicity. The HFF Ethics Committee found the player as the perpetrator and the club and president as accomplices, imposing fines, point deductions, and bans. The Appeals Committee upheld the decision, prompting Aris FC and Karypidis to challenge it at CAS, arguing they were not complicit in the fraud.
The CAS panel scrutinized the evidence, focusing on whether Aris FC knowingly participated in the forgery. Under Greek criminal law, complicity requires material assistance, a causal link to the illegal act, and malicious intent. The standard of proof was "comfortable satisfaction," lying between "beyond reasonable doubt" and "balance of probabilities." The panel found insufficient evidence to comfortably conclude that Aris FC collaborated in the forgery. While the club’s negligence—such as failing to revoke the unexecuted contract and registering the player despite irregularities—was noted, it did not prove complicity. The panel also highlighted the HFF’s oversight in registering the player multiple times based on the same invalid permit.
The panel acquitted Aris FC of violating the HFF Code of Ethics, setting aside the appealed decision and annulling the sanctions. The appeal by Karypidis was dismissed as moot following his death. The CAS upheld Aris FC’s appeal, concluding the charges were unsubstantiated. The ruling underscores the importance of procedural fairness, personal liability in disciplinary matters, and the high evidentiary threshold for serious ethical violations in sports governance. The case clarifies these principles while addressing the specific allegations against Aris FC and its late president.