Soroush Rafiei Telgari v. Foolad Khouzestan Sport and Cultural Club

At a glance

Parties

Soroush Rafiei Telgari (Iranian professional footballer) v. Foolad Khouzestan Sport and Cultural Club (Iran)

Case no.

CAS 2022/A/9279

Forum and rules

Court of Arbitration for Sport, appeals procedure under the CAS Code

Treaty

None. Appeal under the IRIFF Statutes against a decision of the IRIFF Appeal Committee

Tribunal

Steven Bainbridge (Sole Arbitrator)

Sector

Football; employment contract

Outcome

Appeal partially upheld (8 September 2023). The Club terminated without just cause, and the IRIFF decisions were set aside and replaced.

Amount

Claimed: USD 107,000 in unpaid salary and USD 193,000 in compensation, plus a 1% daily penalty. Awarded: compensation of USD 169,560 with 5% interest p.a. from 18 October 2018, plus unpaid salary of USD 107,000 (four instalments) with 5% interest p.a. The costs provisions are redacted in the published award.

The dispute

On or about 23 July 2018, the Player signed a one-season contract with the Club for the 2018/2019 season, worth USD 300,000 in total. He received no payments under it. After he was injured, the Player told the Head Coach and travelled briefly to ASPETAR in Doha for an MRI scan. In late September 2018 the Club began a unilateral termination with the Iranian football authorities. It relied on contract clauses on injury procedure (Article 6 para. 15) and on leaving the country without permission (Article 7 para. 9). The Player learned of the termination only on 18 October 2018. The IRIFF Players' Status Committee treated the termination as justified and awarded him only the salary due up to termination, the IRIFF Appeal Committee affirmed, and the Player appealed to CAS seeking compensation for termination without just cause.

Key holdings

1. The Club's Answer is inadmissible. It was sent by email within the time limit, but it was not uploaded or couriered by the next business day as Article R31 of the CAS Code requires. Parties must make sure they comply with the Code's formal requirements. The Club was still heard at the hearing. ¶¶ 78–89
2. The Head Coach knew of the Player's trip, and no contract provision required permission from the CEO, so the leave was authorised. A player's health is a fundamental right. A club may not refuse a player's request for a diagnostic assessment without reasonable grounds, and here the Player was entitled to have the examination abroad. A breach of Article 6 para. 15 could in any case lead only to a fine. ¶¶ 95–100
3. Article 7 para. 9 lets only the Club terminate unilaterally and is potestative, so it is null and void and cannot justify the termination. ¶¶ 101–105
4. The Club had no just cause in any event. Only a material breach can justify termination, and a prior warning is required. The Player received no warning and was not heard by the Club's disciplinary committee, whose decision came after the termination process had started. IRIFF's acceptance of the termination could not cure these flaws. ¶¶ 106–110
5. Compensation is the residual value of the contract (USD 193,000), reduced by USD 23,440 for his earnings under the new contract with Persepolis. That contract was valued at the date it was signed, about 7 January 2019, not at the date of the award. The result is USD 169,560, with 5% interest p.a. from 18 October 2018 under Swiss law as applied in CAS case law. ¶¶ 114–127
6. The Player recovers USD 107,000 in unpaid salary. The contractual penalty of 1% per day (365% p.a.) is usurious and contrary to Swiss public policy, which the tribunal applies ex officio. The penalty is replaced by 5% interest p.a. on each instalment. ¶¶ 128–136

Procedural history

1. 23 July 2018Employment contract signed (on or about this date).
2. 25–26 September 2018The Club sends requests to terminate the contract to the Iranian football authorities.
3. 18 October 2018In Mashhad, league officials tell the Player that his contract has been terminated.
4. 7 June 2021The IRIFF Players' Status Committee upholds the Club's termination as justified and rejects the Player's claim for compensation.
5. 19 July 2022The IRIFF Appeal Committee affirms that decision. It is notified to the Player on 31 October 2022.
6. 19 November 2022Statement of Appeal filed with CAS.
7. 6 February 2023Sole Arbitrator Steven Bainbridge appointed.
8. 16 March 2023Hearing held by video-conference.
9. 8 September 2023Award: appeal partially upheld.

Tribunal, counsel and experts

Decided by

• Steven Bainbridge Sole arbitrator, Court of Arbitration for Sport — appointed by the institution

For the claimant

Vosough Ahmadi Rouzbeh

For the respondent

Yaraghi Esfahani Mahshid · Arefnia Aref

Run a conflict check on these names →

Keywords

• termination without just cause
• potestative clause
• player's health
• fundamental right
• medical diagnostics abroad
• ASPETAR
• mitigation of damages
• residual value of contract
• usurious interest
• Swiss public policy
• default interest 5%
• admissibility of Answer
• Article R31 CAS Code
• IRIFF
• FIFA RSTP
• Persepolis
• right to be heard
• football

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