CAS 2021 A 7865
CAS · Football (FIFA / CAS) · Switzerland · 17 Jan 2023
Why it matters
This case clarifies the jurisdictional limits of the FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) and, by extension, CAS, particularly concerning disputes between a player and a club of the same nationality. It reinforces that an International Transfer Certificate (ITC) request alone does not automatically confer international dimension or FIFA jurisdiction if the underlying employment dispute is purely domestic. It highlights the principle of national associations' autonomy in resolving internal disputes, provided their mechanisms comply with FIFA standards.
Summary
Aliaksandr Paulavets, a Belarusian professional football player, had an employment contract with FC Dynamo Brest, a Belarusian club. From March 2020, the Club failed to pay Paulavets his monthly salary in full. Paulavets put the Club in default and, after an extended deadline, terminated his contract for just cause on 8 October 2020. The Club, however, claimed it had terminated the contract earlier, on 6 October 2020, for alleged violations by the player. Paulavets subsequently signed with FC Rostov (Russia), and an International Transfer Certificate (ITC) was requested for his transfer. Paulavets lodged a claim before the FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) for outstanding remuneration and compensation for breach of contract. The Club argued that the dispute was purely national and should be handled by the Belarusian Football Federation (ABFF). The ABFF had previously issued a decision confirming the Club's right to terminate and condemning Paulavets to pay EUR 125,000, which Paulavets appealed, but the appeal was rejected on procedural grounds. On 25 February 2021, the FIFA DRC declared Paulavets' claim inadmissible, concluding it lacked jurisdiction because the dispute did not have the necessary 'international dimension' as required by Article 22(a) and 22(b) of the FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (RSTP). The DRC held that for jurisdiction under Article 22(a), the former club must lodge a claim against the player and new club, and for Article 22(b), the player and club must have different nationalities. Since both parties were Belarusian and the player initiated the claim, the DRC found it was a domestic matter. Paulavets appealed the FIFA DRC decision to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). He argued that the dispute *did* have an international dimension due to the ITC request for his transfer to a Russian club and that FIFA should have jurisdiction. He also challenged the legitimacy of the ABFF's dispute resolution mechanism. The Sole Arbitrator at CAS dismissed Paulavets' appeal and confirmed the FIFA DRC's decision. The CAS agreed that the dispute was domestic because both the player and the club were of Belarusian nationality. The request for an ITC was deemed an administrative procedure separate from the employment dispute itself and did not automatically confer international jurisdiction to FIFA or CAS for the underlying contractual dispute. The CAS reiterated that FIFA's jurisdiction for employment disputes between a player and a club is generally limited to cases where the player is a foreigner in the country of the club, or where the former club lodges a claim against the player and new club in connection with an international transfer. Since neither applied, the CAS found it lacked jurisdiction to hear the merits of the case. The appeal was dismissed, and Paulavets was ordered to bear the costs of the CAS arbitration.
The detail
Parties: Aliaksandr Paulavets v. FC Dynamo Brest & FIFA
Case number: CAS 2021 A 7865
Outcome: The Court of Arbitration for Sport dismissed the appeal filed by Aliaksandr Paulavets, confirming the FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber's decision that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the dispute.
Applicable law: FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (RSTP), ABFF Regulations, and Swiss law complementarily.
Issues in play: The core legal issue was the jurisdiction of the FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) under Article 22(a) and 22(b) of the FIFA RSTP, specifically regarding the 'international dimension' of a dispute when both player and club share the same nationality, and whether an International Transfer Certificate (ITC) request confers such jurisdiction.
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.