CAS 2019 A 6490
CAS · Football (FIFA / CAS) · Switzerland · 1 Jun 2021
Why it matters
This case clarifies that a football club's unilateral demotion of a head coach to an analyst role constitutes a breach of contract without just cause, triggering a liquidated damages clause. It also confirms that CAS will uphold contractual compensation formulas even if they deviate from the mitigation principle, and that counterclaims are inadmissible in CAS appeals. The decision reinforces the importance of contractual autonomy in football employment disputes.
Summary
Taizhou Yuanda Football Club hired Vicente Girona as head coach from August 2017 to October 2020. In March 2018, the Club hired a new head coach and told Girona to take a vacation, then assigned him as an analyst. Girona protested and gave the Club multiple deadlines to reinstate him. When the Club did not, Girona terminated the contract on 23 April 2018 and filed a claim with FIFA. The FIFA Players' Status Committee found the Club breached without just cause and ordered compensation of RMB 1,885,000 plus interest. The Club appealed to CAS, arguing that Girona's CV was fraudulent (making the contract void under Chinese law) and that Girona actually abandoned his job. The CAS Sole Arbitrator rejected the Club's fraud claim because the Club failed to prove it and had not raised it in time. He found that the Club's demotion of Girona was a serious breach, and Girona's termination was justified. The contract contained a liquidated damages clause (Article 10) requiring payment of remaining salaries after three written warnings. The Sole Arbitrator calculated the remaining salary as RMB 1,875,250 (not RMB 1,885,000 as FIFA had calculated). He refused to deduct Girona's subsequent earnings from coaching in Algeria, because the clause did not require mitigation. The CAS partially upheld the appeal only to correct the amount, confirming the Club's liability. The Club was ordered to pay the compensation plus 5% interest from 3 May 2018, and to bear the arbitration costs and contribute to the Respondents' legal fees.
The detail
Parties: Taizhou Yuanda Football Club v. Vicente Girona Izquierdo & FIFA
Case number: CAS 2019 A 6490
Outcome: The appeal was partially upheld; the FIFA decision was confirmed except the compensation amount was reduced to RMB 1,875,250 plus 5% interest from 3 May 2018. The Club must pay this amount and contribute CHF 5,000 to the Respondents' legal costs.
Quantum: RMB 1,875,250
Applicable law: FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (RSTP) by analogy; Swiss law; Chinese law (Labour Contract Law) argued but not applied; Contract terms.
Issues in play: The main collision was between the Club's argument that the Coach's CV misrepresentations made the contract void under Chinese law, and the Coach's claim that the Club breached by demoting him. The CAS applied Swiss law and the contract's liquidated damages clause, rejecting Chinese law and the Club's fraud claim.
Read the full decision at Court of Arbitration for Sport (football, via FIFA) ↗
Locus Standi links to the source decision and publishes its own plain-language summary. It does not reproduce the text of the award.