What is Locus Standi?

Locus Standi is a platform for the dispute-resolution world. It brings together arbitration, mediation and adjudication events, jobs and internships, and landmark arbitral awards explained in plain English, alongside the qualifications and pathways into the field. It was established in London at LIDW26 by the alumni of Queen Mary University of London.

Can Locus Standi help me understand a dispute?

Yes. Locus Standi offers free dispute help: paste your contract's dispute-resolution clause and a short note on what happened, and it works out the type of dispute, the governing law, your options, the right forum to file in, and drafts a basic document to start from, all in plain English.

What is the agentic AI case officer?

Locus Standi's workspace includes an AI case officer that helps practitioners run their matters: tracking stages and deadlines, raising alerts, organising to-dos and documents, and drafting. It is built for arbitrators, mediators and the institutions that administer disputes.

Where can I find arbitration events and internships?

Locus Standi keeps a live calendar of arbitration, mediation and adjudication events with one-tap calendar export, and a board of arbitration jobs and internships from institutions including the PCA, ICC, LCIA, SCC, SIAC and AIAC.

Club de Regatas Vasco da Gama v. Pedro Cabral Silva Junior (CAS 2016/A/4741) (CAS)

Why it matters

This case clarifies that the FIFA Players' Agents Regulations only apply to negotiations for employment contracts or transfer agreements, not to settlement of disputes arising from a prior transfer. It also reinforces that an agent must personally perform services and avoid conflicts of interest, prohibiting delegation or dual representation.

Summary

Vasco da Gama (the Club) had a dispute with Al-Ittihad over unpaid transfer fees for player D. After FIFA and CAS proceedings, the Club authorized agent Pedro Cabral Silva Junior for 15 days to negotiate a settlement. The authorization expired without action. Later, the Club's lawyer directly negotiated a settlement with Al-Ittihad. The agent claimed a 10% commission, arguing the authorization was tacitly extended and that his business partner Rodrigo Nunes de Oliveira helped. The Brazilian CBF's dispute resolution chamber (CRL) initially awarded 10%, then reduced to 3%. The Club appealed to CAS. The Sole Arbitrator found: (1) the FIFA PAR only cover agent activities in negotiating employment contracts or transfer agreements, not settlement of disputes, so the CRL lacked jurisdiction; (2) even if applicable, the agent failed to prove he provided any services, the settlement was negotiated by the Club's lawyer; (3) the authorization was not extended; (4) the agent's alleged partner represented Al-Ittihad, creating a conflict of interest under FIFA PAR Article 19(8). The CAS upheld the appeal, set aside the CRL decision, and rejected the agent's claim.

The detail

Parties: Club de Regatas Vasco da Gama v Pedro Cabral Silva Junior

Case number: CAS 2016/A/4741

Outcome: Appeal upheld; CRL decision set aside; Agent awarded no commission.

Applicable law: FIFA Players' Agents Regulations (2008 edition), Brazilian Civil Code, Swiss law, CRL Internal Regulations

Issues in play: Whether the FIFA PAR apply to an agent's services in settling a dispute between clubs (not a transfer or employment contract), and whether an agent may delegate his role to a partner or act for both sides.

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.

Back to the awards board