G. v. O. (CAS 2006/A/1019)
CAS · Football (FIFA / CAS) · Switzerland · 5 December 2006
Why it matters
This case clarifies that a players' agent is not entitled to commission merely for introducing a player to a club; the agent must be the effective cause of the contract's conclusion. It also confirms that an exclusivity clause does not prevent the player from negotiating and signing a contract personally, and the agent cannot claim commission or damages if the player contracts himself.
Summary
The case concerns a dispute between a FIFA-licensed players' agent (G.) and a football player (O.) over commission for the player's transfer to Incheon United. The agent and player signed a 24-month exclusive representation contract in February 2003, under which the agent was to receive 10% of the player's gross salary from any employment contract negotiated by the agent. In January 2004, the player signed a two-year contract with Incheon United without the agent's involvement, except that the agent had sent a fax to the club's coach in January 2004 introducing the player. The agent claimed commission, arguing that his introduction entitled him to payment. The FIFA Players' Status Committee rejected the claim, and the agent appealed to CAS. The sole arbitrator applied Swiss law and FIFA regulations, noting that the agency contract did not expressly provide for commission upon introduction. The arbitrator held that an agent earns commission only when he is the effective cause of the transaction; mere introduction is insufficient. The exclusivity clause only prevented the player from hiring another agent, not from contracting personally. Since the agent failed to prove any significant involvement in the negotiations or conclusion of the contract, he was not entitled to commission. The appeal was dismissed, and the FIFA decision upheld.
The detail
Parties: G. v. O
Case number: CAS 2006/A/1019
Outcome: Appeal dismissed; FIFA Players' Status Committee decision upheld; agent not entitled to commission.
Applicable law: FIFA regulations and Swiss law
Issues in play: Agency law principles on entitlement to commission: whether mere introduction suffices or effective causation is required; exclusivity clause does not prevent player from contracting personally.
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.