Skip to main content
International Arbitration Forum

Galatasaray SK v. Jordi Guerrero Costa

Case summary

At a glance

Parties
Galatasaray Sportif A.S. (Turkey), appellant, v. Jordi Guerrero Costa (Spanish football coach), respondent
Case no.
CAS 2022/A/9301
Forum and rules
Court of Arbitration for Sport, appeal procedure under the Code of Sports-related Arbitration; FIFA regulations, with Swiss law applying subsidiarily
Treaty
Contract clause (Article 6 of the employment contract of 14 January 2022) and Article 57.1 of the FIFA Statutes
Tribunal
Leanne O'Leary (Sole Arbitrator)
Sector
Football; coach employment
Outcome
Appeal partially upheld (30 May 2023). The club had no just cause to terminate the contract, but the compensation is payable in the instalments set out in the contract, not as a lump sum.
Amount
Awarded: EUR 1,500 outstanding housing allowance plus 5% p.a. from 22 June 2022, and EUR 200,000 compensation in ten instalments of EUR 20,000 (31 August 2022 to 31 May 2023), each with 5% p.a. interest from the day after its due date. The costs rulings (operative items 3 and 4) are omitted from the published text.

The dispute

Galatasaray hired Jordi Guerrero Costa as First Assistant Coach on 14 January 2022, under a contract running to 31 May 2023. Article 4 of the contract provided that, on termination by the club without just cause, the coach would receive the residual value of the contract, paid on the salary schedule, with no deduction for mitigation. A new club board was elected on 11 June 2022, and talks on a mutual termination failed. On 21 June 2022 the club terminated the contract for just cause. It relied on the coach's alleged unauthorised absence, his failure to report on technological developments, and the team's poor results. The FIFA Players' Status Chamber awarded the coach EUR 1,500 and a lump sum of EUR 200,000. On appeal, the club argued just cause, ne ultra petita, invalidity of Article 4 as a disproportionate, non-reciprocal liquidated damages clause, and that any compensation should be reduced or paid in instalments.

Key holdings

  1. The ne ultra petita objection fails. Because the CAS hears the case de novo, any flaw in the proceedings before the Players' Status Chamber is cured by the appeal. ¶¶ 46–47
  2. The alleged unauthorised absence was not proved. The only evidence was an on-site inspection report for one morning, 21 June 2022. There was no request to return to work and no disciplinary proceeding. The coach did not breach Article 2.8 of the contract. ¶¶ 61–62
  3. There was no breach of the reporting duty in Article 2.20. The club never requested the reports or raised any concern before the Dismissal Letter. ¶¶ 65–66
  4. Unsubstantiated poor team results do not justify termination for just cause. Poor results can be a ground for termination only if the contract expressly says so and clearly defines "poor results"; this contract did not. The termination of the head coach's contract also gave no just cause. The club therefore terminated without just cause. ¶¶ 69–74
  5. Article 4 is a valid liquidated damages clause and takes priority over Article 6 of Annexe 2 of the FIFA RSTP. No inequality of bargaining power in the coach's favour was shown, and both parties had lawyers. A lack of reciprocity does not invalidate the clause, and the club did not show an excessive commitment that gave the coach undue control. No reduction for the coach's conduct was allowed. ¶¶ 77–91
  6. The EUR 1,500 housing allowance for June 2022 is due; the inadimplenti non est adimplendum defence was rejected. The EUR 200,000 compensation is payable in instalments as Article 4 provides, not as a lump sum, with 5% interest from the day after each due date. ¶¶ 92–96

Procedural history

  1. 14 January 2022The employment contract is signed.
  2. 21 June 2022The club terminates the contract for just cause by the Dismissal Letter.
  3. 25 July 2022The coach files a claim before the FIFA Players' Status Chamber.
  4. 29 September 2022The Players' Status Chamber partially accepts the claim and awards EUR 1,500 and EUR 200,000 with interest. The grounds are notified on 17 November 2022.
  5. 30 November 2022Galatasaray files its Statement of Appeal with the CAS. Four related appeals concern other members of the coaching staff.
  6. 31 January 2023Leanne O'Leary is appointed Sole Arbitrator. The parties agree to a decision on the written submissions, without a hearing.
  7. 30 May 2023Award: the appeal is partially upheld, on the mode of payment only.

Tribunal, counsel and experts

Decided by
  • Leanne O'Leary Sole arbitrator, Court of Arbitration for Sport — appointed by the institution

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 2022/A/9301
Claimant
Galatasaray SK
Respondent
Jordi Guerrero Costa
Documents

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