Skip to main content
International Arbitration Forum

Mohamed Zakaria Khalil, Soufiane El Mesbahi, Yassir Kilani v. International Tennis Integrity Agency (ITIA)

Case summary

At a glance

Parties
Mohamed Zakaria Khalil, Soufiane El Mesbahi and Yassir Kilani (Moroccan tennis players) v. International Tennis Integrity Agency (ITIA)
Case no.
CAS 2021/A/8531
Forum and rules
Court of Arbitration for Sport, appeals arbitration under the CAS Code; Tennis Anti-Corruption Program (TACP), governed by Florida law
Treaty
Tennis Anti-Corruption Program, Section I.1 (appeal to CAS)
Tribunal
Philippe Sands (President), Sophie Dion, Romano F. Subiotto
Sector
Tennis; match-fixing
Outcome
Appeal dismissed (9 March 2023); the AHO decision of 7 December 2021 imposing 9-year bans and fines is confirmed.
Amount
Sanction confirmed: 9-year ban and a fine of US$ 5,000 for each player. The players' claim for US$ 400,000 each in damages was not examined.

The dispute

Three young Moroccan tennis players appealed a decision of the ITIA's Anti-Corruption Hearing Officer (AHO) of 7 December 2021. The AHO found them guilty of match-fixing and of failing to report corrupt approaches at ITF Futures tournaments in Morocco in July and November 2017. The ITIA's case rested on WhatsApp messages taken from the phones of Grigor Sargsyan (GS) during a Belgian criminal investigation. In those messages GS and an intermediary, Younes Rachidi (YR), agreed fixes, such as losing the third service game in both sets, for named players. The messages were backed by match scores, MoneyGram transfer receipts and betting alerts. The players argued that the evidence had been obtained illegally and that the TACP did not apply to amateur players or to minors. They denied any contact with the corruptors, said they received no money and called the sanctions disproportionate. They also claimed US$ 400,000 each in damages.

Key holdings

  1. The ITIA's Answer was filed on time. The deadline did not start on 3 January 2022, because the ITIA did not then have the Statement of Appeal, and procedural deadlines were suspended from 5 to 31 January 2022. ¶¶ 69–70
  2. The evidence from the Belgian authorities is admissible. Under Section G.3.c TACP, the test is whether evidence is reliable. Even illegally obtained evidence could be relied on, but nothing on the record showed that this evidence was obtained or passed to the ITIA illegally, and admitting it did not breach procedural public order. ¶¶ 83–87
  3. The TACP applies. ITF Futures tournaments are "Events" because Appendix 1 lists the ITF Pro Circuit, and minors are not excluded. Each player's IPIN for 2017 was signed by a parent or guardian, which binds the minor under Florida law. Mr El Mesbahi is bound by his representation that Jamal El Mesbahi could sign for him. ¶¶ 93–98
  4. An attempt to contrive a match is enough for an offence, and the fix may concern any aspect of a match. No financial reward needs to be shown. ¶ 102
  5. The charges are proved. The messages, read together with the match scores, the payment exchanges and the betting alerts, show that Mr El Mesbahi fixed four matches and that Mr Kilani and Mr Khalil each fixed two. Each also failed to report the approaches made to him and his partners' offences. ¶¶ 111–153
  6. The sanction is upheld. Applying the ITIA 2021 Guidelines, the Panel placed the offences in culpability Category B and, by majority, in impact Category 1, with a starting point of 10 years. The players' youth was outweighed by the need for deterrence and by their lack of remorse or any alternative explanation. The 9-year bans were not evidently and grossly disproportionate, the US$ 5,000 fines were proportionate, and the damages claims did not need to be examined. ¶¶ 161–170

Procedural history

  1. 15 June 2021The ITIA issues a Notice of Charge to the three players and three other players.
  2. 13 July 2021The AHO imposes provisional suspensions.
  3. 7 December 2021The AHO finds the charges proved, after a hearing on 22–23 November 2021, and imposes 9-year bans and US$ 5,000 fines.
  4. 30 December 2021The players file their Statement of Appeal with CAS, together with a request for provisional measures.
  5. 31 January 2022Order on Language: English is to be the language of the proceedings.
  6. 21 March 2022The Panel is constituted.
  7. 24 June 2022Hearing by videoconference.
  8. 9 March 2023Award: appeal dismissed and the AHO decision confirmed.

Tribunal, counsel and experts

Decided by
For the claimant
Sophie Hayrant-Gwinner
For the respondent
ITIA (in-house) · Kendrah Potts

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 2021/A/8531
Claimant
Mohamed Zakaria Khalil, Soufiane El Mesbahi, Yassir Kilani
Respondent
International Tennis Integrity Agency (ITIA)
Documents

Procedure: Appeal
Sport: Tennis
Matter: Disciplinary (except doping)
Outcome: Dismissed
Panel: Romano F. Subiotto, Sophie Dion, Philippe Sands
Source: Court of Arbitration for Sport case database.