Nyiregyhaza Spartacus Football Club Kft. v. Vukasin Poleksic

At a glance

Parties

Nyíregyháza Spartacus Football Club Kft. (Hungary) v. Vukašin Poleksić (assistant coach, Montenegrin national, Hungarian citizen from mid-2020)

Case no.

CAS 2021/A/7775

Forum and rules

Court of Arbitration for Sport, appeal arbitration under the CAS Code (2020 edition)

Treaty

None. Clause XI.4 of the Employment Contract and Article 22 lit. c) of the FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players

Tribunal

Prof. Ulrich Haas (President), Prof. Eligiusz Krzesniak, Mr Rui Botica Santos

Sector

Football; coach employment

Outcome

Appeal upheld (25 November 2022). The FIFA PSC decision was set aside because the Single Judge had no jurisdiction.

Amount

The FIFA decision had awarded compensation for breach of contract in HUF plus 5% interest from 30 April 2020. The amount is redacted in the published award. That award was set aside.

The dispute

The Hungarian club hired Vukašin Poleksić as assistant coach on 1 October 2019 under a fixed-term contract running to 30 June 2021. The contract was governed by Hungarian law. On 20 November 2019 the club terminated it with immediate effect. It cited his absence from a video analysis session on 5 November 2019 and his failure to run pre-match warm-up drills. The coach brought a claim before the FIFA Players' Status Committee. On 18 February 2021 the Single Judge notified the reasoned decision, finding that the club had terminated without just cause and ordering it to pay compensation. On appeal the club argued that FIFA lacked jurisdiction because the contract sent labour disputes to the Hungarian Administrative and Labour Court and the dispute had no international dimension. It also alleged procedural flaws, argued that Hungarian law applied, and maintained that it had just cause. The coach objected that the appeal was late, argued that he could not be sued alone without FIFA, and defended FIFA's jurisdiction.

Key holdings

1. The appeal was filed in time. The 21-day time limit ran from receipt of the reasoned decision on 18 February 2021, not from notice of the First Decision in August 2020. The appeal filed on 10 March 2021 was therefore admissible. ¶¶ 92–94
2. The coach's alternative request to move the start date for interest was a counterclaim or cross-appeal. Such requests have been inadmissible in CAS appeal proceedings since the 2010 revision of the CAS Code. The coach would have needed to file his own appeal. ¶¶ 95–99
3. FIFA regulations apply first, with Swiss law used to interpret them. Hungarian law, the law the parties chose, governs matters the regulations do not cover. The 2020 RSTP applies, and its provisions on players do not apply by analogy to coaches. ¶¶ 108–114
4. The dispute is horizontal. FIFA acted only as adjudicator, its interests are the same as the coach's, and it declined to take part under Article R41.3. The coach therefore has standing to be sued alone. ¶¶ 122–127
5. The dispute had an international dimension. When the dispute arose, the coach held only Montenegrin nationality, and under the principle of perpetuatio fori his later Hungarian citizenship does not change this. ¶¶ 132–133
6. Parties may contract out of FIFA jurisdiction under Article 22 RSTP if they do so freely. Read in good faith, Clause XI.4 gives exclusive jurisdiction over labour disputes to the competent Hungarian Administrative and Labour Court. The club did not waive its objection by defaulting before FIFA or by appealing to the CAS. ¶¶ 135–143
7. The FIFA PSC had no jurisdiction, so the Appealed Decision is set aside. Because the Panel's mandate is limited to the scope of the previous instance, it did not decide the merits. ¶¶ 144–145; operative part

Procedural history

1. 1 October 2019The club and the coach sign the employment contract.
2. 20 November 2019The club terminates the contract with immediate effect.
3. 30 April 2020The coach files his claim before the FIFA Players' Status Committee.
4. 11 August 2020The Single Judge issues the First Decision, partially accepting the claim. FIFA later rectifies it (16 December 2020).
5. 18 February 2021The reasoned Appealed Decision is notified to the club.
6. 10 March 2021The club files its appeal with the CAS.
7. 14 May 2021The Panel is constituted, after the coach's first two nominees, Petra Pocrnic Perica and Nicholas Stewart, did not serve.
8. 15 July 2021Hearing held by videoconference.
9. 25 November 2022Award: appeal upheld and the FIFA decision set aside for lack of jurisdiction.

Tribunal, counsel and experts

Decided by

• Ulrich Haas President, CAS Panel — appointed by the institution
• Eligiusz Krześniak Co-arbitrator, CAS Panel — appointed by the claimant
• Rui Botica Santos Co-arbitrator, CAS Panel — appointed by the respondent (nominated after Petra Pocrnic Perica could not act and Nicholas Stewart declined following a challenge)

For the claimant

Hegymegi-Barakonyi and Partner Baker & McKenzie

For the respondent

Davor Lazić

Run a conflict check on these names →

Keywords

• football coach
• FIFA Players' Status Committee
• Article 22 RSTP
• international dimension
• dual nationality
• perpetuatio fori
• choice of forum clause
• exclusive jurisdiction
• Hungarian labour court
• standing to be sued
• horizontal dispute
• vertical dispute
• counterclaim inadmissible
• Article R58 CAS Code
• applicable law
• termination with just cause
• Nyíregyháza

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