Skip to main content
International Arbitration Forum

Al Hilal Khartoum v. Confédération Africaine de Football (CAF)

Case summary

At a glance

Parties
Al Hilal Club (Omdurman, Sudan) v. Confédération Africaine de Football (CAF)
Case no.
CAS 2022/A/8664
Forum and rules
Court of Arbitration for Sport, appeal arbitration under the CAS Code (2021 edition); Article 48 CAF Statutes
Tribunal
Manfred Nan (President), Michele A.R. Bernasconi, Benoît Pasquier
Sector
Football
Outcome
Appeal declared inadmissible (20 March 2024): the Club had not first appealed to the CAF Appeal Board.
Amount
Claimed: USD 917,000 in damages plus 5% interest from 16 February 2022. Awarded: nothing; the damages claim became moot. CAF asked for CHF 10,000 towards its legal fees; the published award omits the costs ruling.

The dispute

Al Hilal Club, a Sudanese football club, was due to host Al Ahly SC in CAF Champions League match no. 85 in Khartoum on 18 February 2022. This came after the military coup in Sudan of 25 October 2021. CAF had first told the Club by email that it could host spectators. On 16 February 2022, CAF's Development Director then decided that the match would be played behind closed doors, citing "updated intelligence" that the situation in the country was not favourable for large gatherings. The Club appealed to CAS. It argued that the decision gave no reasons, was issued without hearing the Club, breached CAF's Spectator Procedure and the principle of venire contra factum proprium, and caused it losses of USD 917,000. CAF objected to CAS jurisdiction and to admissibility because the Club had not exhausted internal remedies before the CAF Appeal Board. On the merits, CAF argued that the Club had not shown that it had appointed a National Safety and Security Officer, and that the damages were inflated.

Key holdings

  1. The CAS Division President dismissed the Club's request for provisional measures on the "irreparable harm" test. That ruling does not establish CAS jurisdiction, because jurisdiction is assessed there only prima facie and the finding does not bind the Panel. ¶ 54
  2. Exhaustion of internal remedies is a question of admissibility, not jurisdiction (following CAS 2019/A/6298). Under Article 48(3) of the CAF Statutes, CAS has jurisdiction. ¶¶ 55–57
  3. The 2021 CAF Statutes, the 2018 CAF Disciplinary Code and the 2019 CAF Champions League Regulations apply, because they were in force when the dispute arose in 2022. ¶ 63
  4. The CAF Appeal Board may decide on any CAF decision unless CAF's rules declare it final or referable to another body. Article 48(3) of the CAF Statutes allows an appeal to CAS only against a last-instance decision. This applies even though the decision was issued by the Development Director and not by a standing committee, given the broad wording of Article 54(1) of the CAF Disciplinary Code. ¶¶ 77–81
  5. Indicating the available appeal remedies in a decision would be good practice, but CAF's rules do not require it, so the omission has no consequence. The Club did not argue that the urgency allowed it to bypass the Appeal Board. In any case, the Appeal Board Chairman can order provisional measures (Article 14(1)(c) of the CAF Disciplinary Code), so an appeal there would have been an effective remedy. ¶¶ 82–86
  6. Because internal remedies were not exhausted, the appeal is inadmissible. The damages claim depended on the decision being set aside, so it is moot. ¶¶ 87–88; operative part

Procedural history

  1. 16 February 2022CAF's Development Director decides that match no. 85, Al Hilal v. Al Ahly SC, will be played behind closed doors.
  2. 17 February 2022The Club applies to CAS for a stay of execution of the decision.
  3. 18 February 2022The President of the CAS Appeals Arbitration Division dismisses the request for provisional measures on the irreparable harm test. The match is played without spectators.
  4. 25 February 2022The Club files its Statement of Appeal.
  5. 7 July 2022The Panel is constituted.
  6. 29 September 2022Hearing at the CAS headquarters in Lausanne.
  7. 20 March 2024Award: the appeal is declared inadmissible.

Tribunal, counsel and experts

Decided by
For the claimant
Pedro Macieirinha
For the respondent
CAF Legal

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/8664
Claimant
Al Hilal Khartoum
Respondent
Confédération Africaine de Football (CAF)
Documents

Procedure: Appeal
Sport: Football
Matter: Other
Outcome: Inadmissible
Panel: Michele Bernasconi, Manfred Peter Nan, Benoît Pasquier
Source: Court of Arbitration for Sport case database.