CAS 2023 A 9923
CAS · Football (FIFA / CAS) · Switzerland · 17 Dec 2024
Why it matters
This case clarifies that parties to a football employment contract can validly derogate from FIFA DRC jurisdiction by expressly choosing a national court for labour disputes. It reinforces the principle that contractual forum selection clauses are binding unless extraordinary circumstances justify deviation, and that experienced players are expected to understand such clauses. The decision limits FIFA's reach in employment matters where parties have agreed otherwise.
Summary
The case arose from a dispute between Hungarian club Mezőkövesd Zsóry FC and Croatian player Matija Katanec. The player was moved to the club's second team, leading to a salary reduction clause being triggered. After unpaid salaries and failure to reintegrate him, the player terminated his contract and claimed before FIFA. The FIFA DRC awarded him compensation. The club appealed to CAS, arguing that the contract's clause XI.49 gave exclusive jurisdiction to the Hungarian Administrative and Labour Court for labour disputes, thus FIFA lacked jurisdiction. The CAS Panel, by majority, agreed. It analyzed the clause's wording, the parties' intentions, and the circumstances of contracting. It found no unequal bargaining power or undue influence, noting the player was an experienced professional. The Panel held that the parties had validly opted out of Article 22(b) RSTP, which grants FIFA jurisdiction over employment disputes unless parties agree otherwise. Therefore, the FIFA DRC decision was set aside. The Panel also rejected the argument that the club had forfeited its jurisdictional objection by participating in the FIFA proceedings or by appealing to CAS. The costs were allocated 2/3 to the player and 1/3 to FIFA, with the player ordered to pay CHF 3,000 towards the club's legal fees.
The detail
Parties: Mezőkövesd Zsóry FC v. Matija Katanec & FIFA
Case number: CAS 2023 A 9923
Outcome: Appeal upheld; FIFA DRC decision set aside for lack of jurisdiction; costs and contribution ordered against Katanec and FIFA.
Applicable law: FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (RSTP), Hungarian labour law, CAS Code of Sports-Related Arbitration
Issues in play: The collision was between the contractual choice of forum (Hungarian Administrative and Labour Court for labour disputes) and FIFA's default jurisdiction under Article 22(b) RSTP. The Panel held that the parties validly opted out of FIFA's 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.