CAS Case Digest · Verified against the full award text

CAS 2024/A/10382 — U Craiova 1948 SA v. André Lourenço Duarte & Reggiana 1919 SRL

"Craiova v. Duarte" · CAS upheld the FIFA DRC ruling that Craiova's unilateral extension clause was invalid and ordered Craiova to pay the player EUR 6,500 in outstanding salary.

Award date	28 February 2025
Panel	Sole Arbitrator: Mr. José Juan Pintó Sala, Attorney-at-law, Barcelona, Spain
Outcome	Appeal dismissed; DRC decision of 14 December 2023 confirmed in its entirety; Craiova ordered to pay the player EUR 6,500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% p.a. interest from 16 July 2023 until effective payment.
Provisions	Art. 17 RSTP (paras. 2, 3, 4) — compensation and sporting sanctions for unjustified contract termination Art. 18(3) RSTP — professional free to conclude contract with another club within six months of expiry Art. 24 RSTP — consequences of non-payment of DRC decision Art. R47 CAS Code — appeal jurisdiction Art. R48 CAS Code — statement of appeal Art. R51 CAS Code — appeal brief Art. R55 CAS Code — answer Art. R57 CAS Code — production of case file Art. R58 CAS Code — applicable law Art. 56(1) FIFA Statutes 2022 — CAS recognition Art. 56(2) FIFA Statutes 2022 — applicable law in CAS proceedings Art. 57(1) FIFA Statutes 2022 — 21-day appeal deadline Art. 2 Swiss Civil Code — good faith Art. 8 Swiss Civil Code — burden of proof Art. 27 Swiss Civil Code — prohibition of excessive commitments Art. 44 Swiss Code of Obligations — contributory negligence Art. 1270 Romanian Civil Code — pacta sunt servanda

What happened in Craiova v. Duarte

U Craiova 1948 SA (Romania) signed Portuguese player André Lourenço Duarte on 28 June 2022 for the 2022/2023 season, with a unilateral option (Art. IX) allowing Craiova to extend the contract by one year until 30 June 2024 by notifying the Romanian Professional Football League (PFL) by 30 June 2023. On 5 December 2022, Craiova notified the PFL of the extension but never directly notified the player. The player disputed the clause's validity from January 2023 onward, and on 1 July 2023 signed with Italian club Reggiana 1919 SRL. Craiova filed a claim before the FIFA DRC seeking compensation of no less than 580,968.15 Romanian lei plus 5% p.a. interest, and sporting sanctions against the player and Reggiana. On 14 December 2023, the DRC rejected Craiova's claim, found the unilateral extension clause invalid, and ordered Craiova to pay the player EUR 6,500 in outstanding June 2023 salary plus 5% p.a. interest from 16 July 2023. Craiova appealed to CAS. The Sole Arbitrator confirmed the DRC decision in its entirety, finding the clause invalid primarily because Craiova failed to prove it had notified the player of the option's exercise, and because the clause permitted exercise until the very last day of the season, leaving the player in an unreasonably disadvantaged position. The case matters as a clear application of the 'Portmann criteria' to invalidate a unilateral extension clause.

Procedural history of CAS 2024/A/10382

On 15 August 2023, Craiova filed a claim before the FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) against the player and Reggiana, seeking compensation of no less than 580,968.15 Romanian lei plus 5% p.a. interest, and sporting sanctions. On 11 September 2023, the player filed an answer and counterclaim seeking, among other things, EUR 6,500 in outstanding salary. On 14 December 2023, the DRC issued Decision FPSD-11347, rejecting Craiova's claim, finding the unilateral extension clause invalid, and ordering Craiova to pay the player EUR 6,500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% p.a. interest from 16 July 2023. The grounds were notified on 13 February 2024. On 1 March 2024, Craiova filed a Statement of Appeal with CAS under Articles R47 and R48 of the CAS Code, requesting the DRC decision be set aside, the unilateral extension clause be declared valid, compensation be awarded to Craiova, and sporting sanctions be imposed on the player and Reggiana. A hearing was held by videoconference on 29 October 2024.

Key holdings in CAS 2024/A/10382

The unilateral extension clause in the Employment Agreement is invalid because Craiova failed to prove it had directly notified the player of the exercise of the option, as required by Clause VI.1.e) of the Employment Agreement.
A unilateral extension clause that may be exercised until the very last day of the sporting season (30 June 2023) is unreasonable as it leaves the player in a disadvantaged position regarding his employment future and at the mercy of the club for a disproportionately long period.
The Employment Agreement between Craiova and the player expired on 30 June 2023, meaning the player did not breach the contract by signing with Reggiana on 1 July 2023.
Craiova is liable to pay the player EUR 6,500 as outstanding salary for June 2023, as it failed to submit any evidence of the player's alleged absence from training that it relied upon to justify non-payment.
The validity of a unilateral extension clause must be assessed on a case-by-case basis applying the Portmann criteria, as neither the FIFA RSTP nor CAS jurisprudence declares such clauses absolutely void under all circumstances.

How the CAS panel reasoned

The Sole Arbitrator applied a case-by-case analysis using the seven criteria established in CAS 2013/A/3260 (the 'Portmann criteria'), noting that the RSTP contains no express prohibition on unilateral extension clauses. While acknowledging that the clause satisfied several criteria — it was clearly established in the contract, limited to one extension, and included predetermined salary terms — the Sole Arbitrator identified two fatal defects. First, Craiova bore the burden of proving it had validly exercised the option under the conditions the clause established, including direct notification to the player as required by Clause VI.1.e). Craiova failed to produce any evidence of such notification; communication was made only to the FRF/PFL. Second, the clause permitted exercise until 30 June 2023 — the last day of the season — which the Sole Arbitrator found unreasonable by reference to CAS 2013/A/3260 and Article 18(3) RSTP, which allows players to seek new clubs within six months of contract expiry. This deadline left the player unable to plan his career and at Craiova's mercy for an excessively long period. The Sole Arbitrator rejected Craiova's argument that the player's agent had advised him, finding the Representation Agreement showed the agent acted for Craiova, not the player. Having found the clause invalid, the Sole Arbitrator confirmed the EUR 6,500 salary award and declined to rule on the sporting sanctions question.

Why Craiova v. Duarte matters in CAS jurisprudence

This award reinforces the restrictive CAS approach to unilateral extension clauses, confirming that such clauses must satisfy the Portmann criteria cumulatively. It establishes that a clause exercisable until the last day of the season is per se unreasonable, and that a club's failure to directly notify the player — even where the clause only expressly requires notification to the federation — is fatal to the clause's valid exercise where the contract itself grants the player a right to be informed.

Decision: Appeal dismissed; DRC decision of 14 December 2023 confirmed in its entirety; Craiova ordered to pay the player EUR 6,500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% p.a. interest from 16 July 2023 until effective payment.

Cases cited in this award

CAS 2004/A/678 CAS 2005/A/973 CAS 2009/A/973 CAS 2013/A/3260 CAS 2014/A/3852 CAS 2020/A/7011 CAS 2023/A/9444

Frequently asked questions about Craiova v. Duarte

Why was Craiova's unilateral extension clause declared invalid in the Craiova v. Duarte CAS case?

The Sole Arbitrator found two principal defects: Craiova failed to prove it had directly notified the player of the option's exercise, as required by Clause VI.1.e) of the Employment Agreement, even though the clause itself only required notification to the FRF/PFL. Additionally, the clause permitted exercise until 30 June 2023 — the very last day of the sporting season — which was found unreasonable as it left the player at Craiova's mercy for a disproportionately long period and unable to plan his career.

What are the Portmann criteria applied in Craiova v. Duarte to assess unilateral extension clauses?

As cited from CAS 2013/A/3260, the seven criteria are: (1) the potential maximum duration of the employment relationship should not be excessive; (2) the option should be exercised within an acceptable deadline before expiry; (3) the salary reward should be defined in the original contract; (4) one party should not be at the mercy of the other; (5) the option should be clearly established in the original contract; (6) the extension period should be proportional to the main contract; and (7) it is advisable to limit extensions to one. The Sole Arbitrator found the clause failed primarily on criteria 2 and 4.

Was the player André Lourenço Duarte entitled to the June 2023 salary from Craiova?

Yes. The DRC ordered Craiova to pay EUR 6,500 as outstanding remuneration for June 2023 plus 5% p.a. interest from 16 July 2023, and CAS confirmed this award. Craiova argued the player had breached the contract by absenting himself from training, but failed to submit any evidence to support that allegation, so the Sole Arbitrator applied the pacta sunt servanda principle and held Craiova liable for the unpaid salary.

Did Reggiana 1919 face any sporting sanctions or compensation liability in the Craiova v. Duarte case?

No. Because the Sole Arbitrator found the unilateral extension clause invalid and the Employment Agreement expired on 30 June 2023, the player was free to sign with Reggiana on 1 July 2023 without breaching any contract. Accordingly, there was no basis for compensation under Art. 17 RSTP or for sporting sanctions, and Craiova's requests in that regard were dismissed. The Sole Arbitrator also left open whether Craiova had standing to seek sporting sanctions at all.

Go deeper than the digest

Ask LexXi how this award has been applied since, compare it with related jurisprudence across 14,900+ indexed FIFA & CAS documents, and get answers with verified citations.

Ask LexXi about Craiova v. Duarte — free

Topics: Art. 17 RSTP & contract termination 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.