CAS Case Digest · Verified against the full award text

CAS 2013/A/3091 & CAS 2013/A/3092 & CAS 2013/A/3093 — FC Nantes v. Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) & Al Nasr Sports Club; Ismaël Bangoura v. Al Nasr Sports Club & FIFA; Al Nasr Sports Club v. Ismaël Bangoura & FC Nantes

"Bangoura" · CAS confirmed that Guinean player Bangoura terminated his Al Nasr contract without just cause, upholding EUR 4,500,000 compensation and sanctions on both player and FC Nantes.

What happened in Bangoura

Guinean international Ismaël Bangoura signed a four-year employment contract with UAE club Al Nasr Sports Club on 2 September 2010, following a EUR 7,000,000 transfer from Stade Rennais FC. During the 2011/2012 season, Al Nasr deregistered Bangoura from the UAEFA foreign-player list on 24 October 2011, citing his four-match suspension and anticipated participation in the 2012 Africa Cup of Nations. Al Nasr also paid only half (EUR 180,000) of the EUR 360,000 advance salary due on 1 September 2011. On 3 January 2012, Bangoura filed a claim before the FIFA DRC alleging breach of contract by Al Nasr. On 31 January 2012, he signed with FC Nantes. The FIFA DRC on 16 November 2012 found Bangoura had terminated without just cause and ordered him and FC Nantes jointly to pay Al Nasr EUR 4,500,000, imposed a four-month playing ban on Bangoura, and banned FC Nantes from registering players for two consecutive transfer windows. All three parties appealed to CAS. The Panel dismissed all appeals, confirming the FIFA DRC decision in full. The case matters because it clarifies the threshold for just cause based on partial salary non-payment and temporary deregistration, and articulates the standard for inducement liability under Article 17(4) RSTP where a new club's own lawyer and president facilitated the player's departure.

Procedural history of CAS 2013/A/3091

On 16 November 2012, the FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber issued a decision (notified with grounds on 1 February 2013) finding that Bangoura had terminated his employment contract with Al Nasr without just cause during the protected period. The DRC ordered Bangoura and FC Nantes jointly to pay Al Nasr EUR 4,500,000 plus 5% interest as compensation under Article 17 RSTP, imposed a four-month playing restriction on Bangoura, and banned FC Nantes from registering players for two consecutive transfer windows. FC Nantes appealed on 21 February 2013 (CAS 2013/A/3091); Bangoura and Al Nasr each appealed on 22 February 2013 (CAS 2013/A/3092 and CAS 2013/A/3093 respectively). The three proceedings were consolidated before the same Panel. FC Nantes and Bangoura sought reversal of the sanctions; Al Nasr sought an increase in compensation to EUR 9,700,000 and a six-month ban on Bangoura. A hearing was held on 23 May 2013 in Lausanne.

Key holdings in CAS 2013/A/3091

• Where it is undisputed that the player terminated the employment contract, the burden of proof lies on the player to establish just cause for that termination.
• The non-payment of half of a single advance salary instalment (EUR 180,000) does not, without persistence or repetition and without a prior written warning to the club, constitute just cause for unilateral termination of an employment contract.
• A temporary deregistration does not constitute a valid reason justifying termination where the player continued to train with the professional team, continued to receive his monthly salary, and did not complain about the deregistration in a timely manner.
• Article 15 RSTP on sporting just cause is inapplicable where the player terminates his contract during the course of a season rather than within 15 days following the final official match of the season.
• A compensation clause in a contract that is drafted in vague and ambiguous terms and does not clearly reflect the true intention of the parties must be disregarded under Article 17(1) RSTP, and the EUR 4,500,000 transfer offer made by Al Nasr to FC Nantes was properly used as the measure of compensation.

How the CAS panel reasoned

The Panel applied the principle of pacta sunt servanda and equated the RSTP Article 14 concept of 'just cause' with 'good reason' under Article 337(2) of the Swiss Code of Obligations, following CAS 2006/A/1062 and CAS 2008/A/1447. On the salary issue, the Panel found Al Nasr had not proven a verbal agreement to split the advance payment, but held that a single, non-repeated partial non-payment of EUR 180,000 — with monthly salaries continuing to be paid and no prior written warning issued — fell short of the persistent and material non-fulfilment required by established CAS jurisprudence (CAS 2006/A/1180). On deregistration, the Panel accepted that deregistration can in principle infringe personality rights under Articles 28 et seq. of the Swiss Civil Code, but found that because Bangoura continued training with the first team, kept receiving his salary, and raised no documented complaint before 23 January 2012, he had acquiesced to the temporary deregistration. The Panel rejected the sporting just cause argument because Article 15 RSTP requires termination within 15 days of the season's final match. On FC Nantes' inducement, the Panel found that FC Nantes' president recommended its own board member and lawyer (Klatovsky) to represent the player, Klatovsky then filed DRC proceedings on the player's behalf, and FC Nantes sent a transfer inquiry letter to Al Nasr while knowing a valid contract existed — none of which FC Nantes adequately explained — so the Article 17(4) presumption was not rebutted.

Why Bangoura matters in CAS jurisprudence

Bangoura is a leading CAS authority on the threshold for just cause based on partial salary non-payment, establishing that a single unpaid advance instalment without persistence, repetition, or prior written warning is insufficient. It also provides the most detailed CAS analysis of deregistration as a potential personality-rights violation under Swiss Civil Code Articles 28 et seq. while clarifying that acquiescence negates the claim. The award further refines the Article 17(4) inducement standard by holding that a new club's president and board-member lawyer facilitating DRC proceedings on the player's behalf is sufficient to sustain the presumption.

Cases cited in this award

CAS 2006/A/1062 CAS 2006/A/1180 CAS 2007/A/1210 CAS 2006/A/1100 CAS 2007/A/1358 CAS 2007/A/1369

Frequently asked questions about Bangoura

Did Bangoura have just cause to terminate his Al Nasr contract because of the EUR 180,000 unpaid advance salary?

No. The CAS Panel held that the non-payment of half of a single advance salary instalment (EUR 180,000 out of EUR 360,000 due on 1 September 2011) did not constitute just cause because there was no persistence or repetition of non-payment, Bangoura continued to receive his monthly salaries throughout, and he issued no prior written warning to Al Nasr before terminating. The Panel confirmed that a persistent and material non-fulfilment is required under established CAS jurisprudence.

Was Bangoura's deregistration by Al Nasr a valid reason to terminate his contract with just cause?

No, on the specific facts. The Panel accepted that deregistration can in principle breach a player's personality rights under Articles 28 et seq. of the Swiss Civil Code and constitute a valid reason for termination. However, because Bangoura continued training with Al Nasr's professional team throughout the deregistration period, kept receiving his monthly salary, and did not raise any documented complaint before 23 January 2012 — more than a month after leaving Dubai without authorisation — the Panel concluded he had acquiesced to the temporary deregistration.

Why was FC Nantes sanctioned for inducing Bangoura to breach his contract with Al Nasr?

Under Article 17(4) RSTP, a club signing a player who has terminated without just cause is presumed to have induced the breach unless it proves otherwise. FC Nantes failed to rebut this presumption: its president Valdemar Kita recommended his own board member and legal counsel Jean-François Klatovsky to represent Bangoura; Klatovsky then filed DRC proceedings on the player's behalf on 3 January 2012; and FC Nantes sent a transfer inquiry letter to Al Nasr on 26 January 2012 while knowing a valid contract still existed. The Panel found FC Nantes provided no plausible explanation for its active role and upheld the two-registration-period ban.

How was the EUR 4,500,000 compensation figure calculated in the Bangoura case?

The Panel confirmed the FIFA DRC's approach of using the transfer offer made by Al Nasr to FC Nantes on 26 January 2012 — EUR 4,500,000 — as the measure of compensation, on the basis that third-party offers provide important information about a player's market value. The contractual compensation clause in the 28 November 2010 amendment (which referenced EUR 10,000,000) was disregarded because it was drafted in vague and ambiguous terms that did not clearly reflect the parties' true intention, as required by Article 17(1) RSTP.

Topics: Transfers, agents, TPO & sell-on clauses at CAS

Source: official award. This digest was generated by LexXi from the full award text and machine-verified against it — every figure, article and citation above appears in the source. It is an editorial summary, not legal advice. See how ElevenLex verification works.