CAS Case Digest · Verified against the full award text

CAS 2024/A/10955 — A. v. Association Générations de Solidarité Tanger (AGS)

"A. v. AGS Tanger" · CAS dismissed a female player's wage claim after she signed a settlement acknowledging receipt of all dues from her Moroccan club.

What happened in A. v. AGS Tanger

A professional football player contracted with Moroccan club Association Générations de Solidarité Tanger (AGS) under an employment contract running from 3 August 2022 to 30 June 2024, providing a monthly salary of MAD 2,600, a sign-on bonus of MAD 6,000, and match bonuses. On 28 July 2023, the parties signed a settlement terminating the contract early, in which the player expressly declared having received all her dues and gave the club a full and definitive discharge. The player subsequently claimed she had never actually been paid, filing a FIFA DRC claim for MAD 22,103 plus interest. The FIFA DRC rejected her claim on 22 August 2024, finding the settlement was an acknowledgement of receipt rather than a waiver, and that no evidence of duress was produced. The player appealed to CAS, additionally arguing for the first time that the settlement was signed under straitened circumstances (Art. 21 SCO) and that Art. 341.1 SCO barred waiver of earned wages. The Sole Arbitrator confirmed the FIFA DRC decision in full, holding that the player failed to discharge her burden of proof on both the straitened-circumstances claim and the allegation of non-payment. The case matters because it reinforces that a clear contractual acknowledgement of receipt shifts the evidentiary burden to the player, and that Art. 341.1 SCO is inapplicable where the settlement records receipt rather than waiver.

Procedural history of CAS 2024/A/10955

The player and AGS entered into an employment contract in August 2022. On 28 July 2023, they signed a settlement terminating the contract early, with the player acknowledging receipt of all dues. On 22 May 2024, the player sent a default notice to the club. On 27 June 2024, the player filed a claim before the FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber (FIFA DRC) seeking MAD 22,103 plus 5% p.a. interest across several heads (visa fees MAD 3,500; flight tickets MAD 3,403; sign-on bonus MAD 6,000; June 2023 salary MAD 2,600; July 2023 salary MAD 2,600; match bonuses MAD 4,000) and sanctions under Art. 12bis FIFA RSTP. The club did not participate. On 22 August 2024, the FIFA DRC rejected the claim in full without costs. Grounds were notified on 3 October 2024. The player filed a Statement of Appeal with CAS on 21 October 2024, within the 21-day deadline, and her Appeal Brief on 23 November 2024. The club failed to submit an Answer or comply with a document-production order. The Sole Arbitrator decided the matter on written submissions alone.

Key holdings in CAS 2024/A/10955

• The settlement signed by the player constituted a clear and unqualified acknowledgement of receipt of all dues, not a waiver of remuneration, rendering Art. 341.1 SCO inapplicable.
• A player invoking straitened circumstances under Art. 21.1 SCO bears the burden of proving all three cumulative conditions: straitened circumstances, exploitation by the other party, and a clear disparity between performance and consideration.
• Allegations that a player was surrounded by male representatives and presented with a document for the first time at signing, without supporting evidence of pressure, threats or manoeuvres, are insufficient to establish straitened circumstances under Art. 21.1 SCO.
• Where a player alleges non-payment despite a contractual acknowledgement of receipt, the burden of proof rests on the player to provide satisfactory evidence that payment was not in fact made.
• CAS panels exercising de novo review under Art. R57 of the CAS Code may consider new legal arguments raised for the first time on appeal, but the party raising them still bears the applicable burden of proof.

How the CAS panel reasoned

The Sole Arbitrator addressed two issues sequentially. On straitened circumstances, he applied the three-part test from CAS 2016/A/4826 and CAS 2020/A/6727 under Art. 21.1 SCO, noting that the player raised this argument for the first time at CAS. He accepted jurisdiction to hear it under the de novo power of Art. R57 CAS Code (citing CAS 2019/A/6646), but found the player produced no evidence of pressure, threats or manoeuvres. The mere fact of being surrounded by male representatives or receiving the document for the first time at the meeting did not satisfy the evidentiary threshold. On the non-payment allegation, the Sole Arbitrator distinguished between a waiver and an acknowledgement of receipt, finding the settlement's language — expressly declaring receipt of all dues and granting a full and definitive discharge — was unambiguous. He therefore held Art. 341.1 SCO irrelevant. Applying the burden-of-proof principles from Art. 13.5 FIFA Procedural Rules, Art. 8 Swiss Civil Code, and CAS 2019/A/6095, he found the player had not discharged her burden of proving non-payment. The club's non-participation and failure to comply with the document-production order did not shift the outcome, as the player's own evidence was insufficient.

Why A. v. AGS Tanger matters in CAS jurisprudence

This award reinforces the distinction between a contractual acknowledgement of receipt and a waiver of remuneration under Swiss law, clarifying that Art. 341.1 SCO does not assist a player where the settlement records payment received rather than rights surrendered. It also confirms that straitened-circumstances arguments under Art. 21.1 SCO, even when raised for the first time on CAS appeal under the de novo review power, require concrete evidentiary support — contextual allegations about the signing environment alone are insufficient to meet the burden of proof.

Cases cited in this award

CAS 2019/A/6590 CAS 2019/A/6646 CAS 2016/A/4826 CAS 2020/A/6727 CAS 2019/A/6095 CAS 2017/A/5277

Frequently asked questions about A. v. AGS Tanger

Did the CAS find that the settlement agreement in A. v. AGS Tanger was invalid due to straitened circumstances?

No. The Sole Arbitrator applied the three-part test under Art. 21.1 SCO and found the player had produced no evidence of pressure, threats or manoeuvres at the signing on 26 July 2023. The argument that she was surrounded by male representatives and presented with the document for the first time was held insufficient without supporting evidence.

Can a female player rely on Art. 341.1 SCO to recover unpaid wages after signing a settlement that says she received all her dues?

Not on the facts of A. v. AGS Tanger. The Sole Arbitrator held that Art. 341.1 SCO — which bars waiver of mandatory remuneration claims — was irrelevant because the settlement contained a clear acknowledgement of receipt of all dues, not a waiver. The player's remedy was to prove she had not actually been paid, which she failed to do.

Who bears the burden of proof when a player claims she was never paid despite signing a settlement acknowledging receipt of all dues?

The player bears the burden. Applying Art. 13.5 of the FIFA Procedural Rules, Art. 8 of the Swiss Civil Code, and CAS 2019/A/6095, the Sole Arbitrator held that the player must provide satisfactory evidence of non-payment. The club's failure to participate in proceedings did not reverse or discharge that burden.

What amounts did the player claim in A. v. AGS Tanger and what was the total?

The player claimed MAD 3,500 for visa reimbursement, MAD 3,403 for flight tickets, MAD 6,000 for the sign-on bonus, MAD 2,600 for the June 2023 salary, MAD 2,600 for the July 2023 salary, and MAD 4,000 for match bonuses — totalling MAD 22,103 — all plus 5% interest per annum from specified dates. The FIFA DRC and CAS both rejected the claim in full.

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.