PCF CSKA Sofia EAD v. Vanio Kostov (CAS 2011/A/2637)
CAS · Football (FIFA / CAS) · Switzerland · 3 October 2012
Why it matters
This case clarifies that a player's agent commission agreement is valid if it contains an express term making payment conditional on the transfer occurring. The agent need not prove specific acts; the completion of the transfer suffices. It also addresses the burden of proof for partial payment and the applicability of FIFA Regulations regarding agent representation.
Summary
CSKA Sofia appealed a FIFA decision ordering it to pay €30,000 to agent Vanio Kostov. The club argued the agreement was void for lack of consideration because it did not specify the agent's duties. The Sole Arbitrator held that consideration exists where a promise is made in return for an act; here, the club promised to pay €50,000 for the transfer of player C., and the transfer occurred. The agent's involvement was confirmed by a declaration from another agent and the player's own letter. The club also claimed the agent represented the player, but evidence showed the agent acted for the club. Regarding partial payment of €20,000, the Arbitrator found on balance of probabilities that it was made in relation to the agreement, based on an invoice and bank statement. The club's argument that the transfer contract should have named the agent was rejected because the agent acted for the club, not the player. The appeal was dismissed, and the FIFA decision confirmed.
The detail
Parties: PCF CSKA Sofia EAD v. Vanio Kostov
Case number: CAS 2011/A/2637
Outcome: Appeal dismissed; FIFA PSC decision confirmed ordering CSKA Sofia to pay €30,000 plus interest and costs.
Quantum: €30,000 plus 5% interest from 1 December 2007 and CHF 3,000 costs
Applicable law: FIFA Statutes and Regulations; Swiss Civil Code (Art. 8); CAS Code of Sports-related Arbitration
Issues in play: The main legal issue was whether the agent's commission agreement lacked consideration, making it unenforceable. The club argued no consideration because the agent did not specify his duties; the agent argued the transfer itself was sufficient.
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.