Skip to main content
International Arbitration Forum

Esteghlal Football Club v. Azizbek Amanov, Nasaf FC

Case summary

At a glance

Parties
Esteghlal FC (Iran) v. Azizbek Amanov (Uzbek player) and Nasaf FC (Uzbekistan)
Case no.
CAS 2023/A/10102
Forum and rules
Court of Arbitration for Sport, appeals procedure under the CAS Code (2023 edition); appeal against a FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber decision of 24 August 2023
Treaty
Employment contract, Article 10.2 (FIFA bodies, appeal to CAS); FIFA Statutes Article 57(1)
Tribunal
Patrick Grandjean (Sole Arbitrator)
Sector
Football; player employment contract
Outcome
Appeal partially upheld (18 June 2024). The Player had just cause to terminate, but his compensation was cut from USD 450,000 to USD 189,570.
Amount
Esteghlal claimed USD 750,000 from the Respondents; this was rejected. The Player was awarded USD 125,346 in outstanding pay (USD 3,146 + 50,000 + 50,000 + 22,200) and USD 189,570 in compensation, all with 5% interest a year.

The dispute

On 3 February 2022 Esteghlal FC, a Tehran club, signed Uzbek player Azizbek Amanov on a fixed-term contract. The contract ran until the end of the 2023/2024 season or "31st of June 2024", whichever came later. The salary was paid in instalments, and Esteghlal fell behind. On 19 December 2022 the Player put the club in default for USD 125,346.20 and gave it 15 days to pay. On 2 February 2023 he terminated the contract under Article 14bis of the FIFA RSTP, and on 15 February 2023 he joined Nasaf FC. The FIFA DRC awarded the Player his outstanding pay and USD 450,000 in compensation, and it rejected Esteghlal's counterclaim for USD 750,000. On appeal, Esteghlal argued that the notices were sent to and from email addresses other than those in the contract, and that they came from Mr Shuaib Ahmed, who had no proper authority and was not named as an intermediary under Article 18 RSTP. It also argued that the Player failed to mitigate his loss by signing a poorly paid contract. The Respondents filed no Answer. The Player objected that the appeal was inadmissible because Esteghlal had filed it by post rather than by courier.

Key holdings

  1. The appeal is admissible. Esteghlal could not use DHL because of US sanctions and filed by post instead. Article R31 of the CAS Code does not exclude official postal services: "courier delivery" covers both postal and delivery services. The filing party only bears the burden of proving that it sent the submission in time. ¶¶ 58–61
  2. The Article 14bis RSTP requirements were met. The salary was not paid monthly, so the pro-rata value of two months' pay was USD 58,333.32. The default notice of 19 December 2022 went to the club's contractual email address, and Esteghlal admitted receiving it. Article 12 of the contract did not make communications through other addresses void. ¶¶ 73–80
  3. Article 18 RSTP applies only to intermediaries who negotiate transfer agreements or employment contracts, not to a representative instructed to terminate a contract. Under Swiss law (Articles 32 and 38 CO), Mr Shuaib Ahmed acted validly for the Player. The Player ratified his authority by filing a FIFA claim two weeks after the termination. The termination of 2 February 2023 was therefore with just cause. ¶¶ 82–89
  4. Esteghlal must pay the outstanding salaries and bonuses of USD 125,346 under pacta sunt servanda. The Sole Arbitrator kept the USD 450,000 basis for compensation set by the DRC, although the residual value of the contract was USD 550,000, because the Player had claimed and endorsed that figure and Esteghlal did not contest it. ¶¶ 93–99
  5. The failure-to-mitigate argument fails because Esteghlal did not prove it. However, compensation is reduced under Article 17(1)(ii) RSTP. The calculation is USD 450,000, plus USD 87,500 in additional compensation (three monthly salaries, USD 1,050,000 ÷ 36 × 3), less USD 72,930 earned at Nasaf FC, less USD 275,000 earned at Khorfakkan FC up to 31 June 2024. The result is USD 189,570. The Sole Arbitrator took into account the Khorfakkan FC contract, which the Player signed after the FIFA decision. ¶¶ 100–107
  6. Interest runs at 5% a year under Articles 73, 102 and 104 CO, from the dates the DRC set. The appeal is partially upheld, and the operative part of the FIFA decision is amended on compensation only. The award's operative part calls the decision-maker the "FIFA Players' Status Chamber", while its reasoning refers to the DRC. The published text omits items 3 and 4 of the operative part. ¶¶ 108–111; operative part

Procedural history

  1. 3 February 2022Esteghlal and the Player sign the employment contract.
  2. 19 December 2022The Player puts Esteghlal in default for USD 125,346.20 and gives it 15 days to pay.
  3. 2 February 2023The Player terminates the contract under Article 14bis RSTP.
  4. 17 February 2023The Player files a claim with FIFA for USD 580,346. Esteghlal counterclaims USD 750,000 against the Player and Nasaf FC.
  5. 24 August 2023The FIFA DRC partially accepts the Player's claim, awarding the outstanding pay and USD 450,000 in compensation, and rejects the counterclaim. The grounds are notified on 5 October 2023.
  6. 24 October 2023Esteghlal files its Statement of Appeal with CAS by post, followed by its Appeal Brief on 4 November 2023.
  7. 12 December 2023Patrick Grandjean is appointed Sole Arbitrator. On 6 March 2024 the CAS Court Office refuses the Respondents' request for a three-member panel.
  8. 18 June 2024Award, issued on the written submissions: appeal partially upheld and compensation reduced to USD 189,570.

Tribunal, counsel and experts

Decided by

Run a conflict check on these names →

Keywords

Summary generated with AI from the published documents — refer to the award for the authoritative text.

Case ID
CAS 2023/A/10102
Claimant
Esteghlal Football Club
Respondent
Azizbek Amanov, Nasaf FC
Documents

Procedure: Appeal
Sport: Football
Matter: Contractual litigations (except transfer)
Outcome: Partially Upheld
Panel: Patrick Grandjean
Source: Court of Arbitration for Sport case database.