CAS 2023 A 10150
CAS · Football (FIFA / CAS) · Switzerland · 26 Feb 2025
Why it matters
This case clarifies that the sporting sanction under Article 17(4) RSTP is not automatic even when a club breaches a contract during the protected period. The CAS majority held that each case must be assessed individually, and factors such as the club's good faith, support for the injured player, and absence of aggravating circumstances can justify not imposing a ban. This reinforces the principle of proportionality in FIFA disciplinary sanctions.
Summary
Club Al Faisaly terminated the employment contract of player Ahmed Achraf Mohamed Feki after he suffered an injury, relying on Article 37 of the SAFF Regulations which allows termination due to injury. The player filed a claim with the FIFA DRC, which found the termination was without just cause and ordered the Club to pay outstanding salary and compensation, plus imposed a two-registration-period ban on registering new players under Article 17(4) RSTP. The Club appealed to CAS, arguing that the sanction should not be automatic and that it acted in good faith under local regulations. The parties settled the monetary part, leaving only the sporting sanction in dispute. The CAS Panel (majority) held that while the Club breached the contract, the circumstances did not warrant a ban: the Club had supported the player for over a year after injury, paid salary for four months at 100% and then reduced it gradually, and the termination was not for a frivolous reason. The Panel emphasized that Article 17(4) does not mandate a sanction automatically; it requires a case-by-case assessment. Since there were no aggravating factors (the Club was not a repeat offender, the injury-related termination was not itself an aggravating factor, and the salary reduction was not egregious), the ban was set aside. The appeal was partially upheld, and the Club was ordered to bear 80% of the arbitration costs.
The detail
Parties: Club Al Faisaly v. Ahmed Achraf Mohamed Feki & FIFA
Case number: CAS 2023 A 10150
Outcome: The appeal was partially upheld. Point 6 of the FIFA DRC decision (ban on registering new players for two registration periods) was set aside. The Club must pay the player SAR 954,540 in outstanding remuneration and SAR 2,886,349 in compensation, but no sporting sanction was imposed.
Quantum: SAR 3,840,889
Applicable law: FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (RSTP), particularly Article 17(4); Swiss law subsidiarily; SAFF Regulations were considered but not applied.
Issues in play: The main collision was between the FIFA RSTP (which governs international transfers and contract stability) and the SAFF Regulations (which allow termination due to injury). The Club argued that local SAFF rules justified termination, but the Panel held that FIFA regulations prevailed because the contract explicitly referenced FIFA rules and the player had dual nationality.
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.