Yeni Malatyaspor FK v. Moryke Fofana

At a glance

Parties

Yeni Malatyaspor FK (Turkey) v. Moryke Fofana (Ivorian football player)

Case no.

CAS 2021/A/8433

Forum and rules

Court of Arbitration for Sport, appeals procedure under the CAS Code; Swiss PILA Chapter 12

Treaty

None. Appeal under Article 57(1) FIFA Statutes and Article 24(2) FIFA RSTP

Tribunal

Patrick Lafranchi (Sole Arbitrator)

Sector

Professional football; player employment contract

Outcome

Appeal dismissed and the FIFA DRC decision of 8 October 2021 confirmed (award of 16 September 2022).

Amount

DRC award confirmed: EUR 400,000 in outstanding salary plus 5% interest p.a. from each due date. The USD 20,000 FIFA fine also stands. The player had asked for CHF 15,000 in legal fees; the published award omits the costs rulings.

The dispute

The Turkish club Yeni Malatyaspor FK and the Ivorian player Moryke Fofana signed an employment contract for 28 June 2019 to 31 May 2021. For the 2020-2021 season the club owed EUR 900,000 net, payable in ten instalments of EUR 90,000. The player claimed EUR 400,000 in unpaid salary for January to May 2021. On 8 October 2021 the FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) granted the claim with interest. It also fined the club USD 20,000 under Article 12bis RSTP and imposed a conditional ban on registering new players. The club appealed to CAS and asked for the whole decision to be annulled. It relied on its economic difficulties and called the fine unjustified and disproportionate. The player argued that the salaries had not been paid and that the appeal was filed in bad faith, only to delay the sanctions.

Key holdings

1. The DRC decision is partly horizontal and partly vertical. The salary order concerns only the club and the player, so it is horizontal. The USD 20,000 fine is a disciplinary sanction, so it is vertical. ¶¶ 52–56
2. Standing to be sued is a question of substantive law, not of admissibility, and the arbitrator examines it ex officio (iura novit curia). Neither party had raised it. ¶¶ 45, 50
3. A challenge to a sanction imposed by a FIFA body must be brought against FIFA. The club named only the player as respondent, and the player has no standing to be sued on the fine. The appeal against the fine was therefore dismissed and the USD 20,000 fine confirmed, without review of its fairness or proportionality. ¶¶ 53, 57–62
4. Under the principle of pacta sunt servanda, the club owed EUR 900,000 for the season. It had paid only EUR 493,000, so the EUR 400,000 claimed was due. ¶¶ 63–66
5. The club gave no evidence of its financial difficulties. In any event, financial difficulties do not excuse a failure to pay. The 5% interest, which the club did not contest, was confirmed. ¶¶ 68–69
6. The appeal was dismissed, the DRC decision was confirmed and all other requests for relief were dismissed. The published operative part omits points 3 and 4. ¶ 70; operative part

Procedural history

1. 28 June 2019The club and the player sign an employment contract running to 31 May 2021.
2. 2 June 2021The player's counsel sends the club a default notice for EUR 310,000 in overdue salary.
3. 24 June 2021The player files a claim with the FIFA DRC for EUR 400,000 plus interest.
4. 8 October 2021The FIFA DRC grants the claim, imposes a USD 20,000 fine and orders a conditional registration ban. Its grounds are notified on 19 October 2021.
5. 8 November 2021The club files its Statement of Appeal with CAS. Its Appeal Brief follows on 15 November 2021.
6. 11 January 2022Patrick Lafranchi is appointed Sole Arbitrator.
7. 17 February 2022The Sole Arbitrator decides to rule on the written submissions only and invites the parties to comment on standing to be sued; neither does.
8. 16 September 2022Award: the appeal is dismissed and the DRC decision confirmed.

Tribunal, counsel and experts

Decided by

• Patrick Lafranchi Sole arbitrator, Court of Arbitration for Sport — appointed by the institution

Run a conflict check on these names →

Keywords

• football
• FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber
• unpaid salary
• employment contract
• standing to be sued
• vertical and horizontal disputes
• Article 12bis RSTP
• disciplinary fine
• registration ban
• financial difficulties
• pacta sunt servanda
• iura novit curia
• Swiss Code of Obligations
• Yeni Malatyaspor
• FIFA RSTP
• CAS appeal

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