CAS Case Digest · Verified against the full award text

CAS 2025/A/11328 — Ellen Chiwenga v. South African Football Association (SAFA)

"Chiwenga" · CAS upheld a FIFA match agent's fee claim against SAFA despite the absence of a signed written mandate, finding a valid contract through conclusive acts.

What happened in Chiwenga

Ellen Chiwenga, a licensed FIFA Match and Football Agent based in London, arranged two international women's friendly matches for SAFA — against England (29 October 2024) and Denmark (25 October 2024). She repeatedly sought a signed mandate from SAFA as required by the FIFA Match Agents Regulations (MAR), but SAFA refused, citing its internal statutes and offering only a commercial sponsorship mandate unsuitable for match agency work. Both matches took place successfully. Chiwenga invoiced SAFA GBP 9,578 and GBP 9,363 (total GBP 18,941); SAFA never contested the amounts or the work performed but failed to pay. The FIFA Players Status Chamber (decision Ref. Nr. FPSD-48042, 29 January 2025) rejected her claim for lack of a signed contract. On appeal, CAS Sole Arbitrator Maite Nadal Charco reversed that decision, holding that a valid contract existed through conclusive acts under Article 1 of the Swiss CO, that SAFA's refusal to sign the mandate had no legal basis under Article 46 of its own statutes, and that SAFA could not invoke the absence of a written contract it had itself prevented. The award ordered SAFA to pay GBP 18,941 plus 5% interest per annum from 20 October 2024. The case matters because it confirms that a federation cannot weaponise its own failure to formalise a match agency relationship to escape payment obligations.

Procedural history of CAS 2025/A/11328

On 9 December 2024, Chiwenga filed a claim before the FIFA Football Tribunal (Players Status Chamber). FIFA notified SAFA on 17 December 2024; SAFA submitted no response. The FIFA PSC issued decision Ref. Nr. FPSD-48042 on 29 January 2025, rejecting the claim on the ground that no contract had been validly executed between the parties and no document signed by both parties established any service fee. The grounds were notified to the Appellant on 18 March 2025. Chiwenga filed a Statement of Appeal with CAS on 7 April 2025, within the 21-day deadline under Article 50.1 of the FIFA Statutes. The CAS Appeals Arbitration Division appointed a sole arbitrator. An Appeal Brief was filed on 26 September 2025, SAFA's Answer on 15 November 2025, and a videoconference hearing was held on 4 February 2026. CAS was asked to set aside the Appealed Decision and order payment of GBP 18,941 plus interest.

Key holdings in CAS 2025/A/11328

• FIFA is not a necessary party in a horizontal contractual dispute between a match agent and a national association where FIFA acted only as the adjudicating body and has no interest at stake.
• A valid contract under Article 1 of the Swiss CO can be established through conclusive acts — including mediation of match contract signatures, FIFA Tier 1 Forms identifying the agent, and the respondent's silence on invoices — even without a signed written mandate.
• SAFA's interpretation of Article 46 of its own statutes as prohibiting engagement of a match agent was incorrect; that article governs the International Affairs Committee's role in direct organisation and does not preclude a licensed match agent from arranging matches under Articles 13 and 15 of the FIFA MAR.
• A federation that systematically refuses to sign a mandate cannot subsequently invoke the absence of a written contract complying with Articles 16–18 of the FIFA MAR to escape its payment obligations, consistent with the principle commodum ex injuria sua nemo habere debet.
• Default interest of 5% per annum under Article 104(1) of the Swiss CO accrues from the date of default (here, 20 October 2024) until effective payment.

How the CAS panel reasoned

The Sole Arbitrator structured her analysis around four sequential questions. First, she dismissed SAFA's argument that FIFA's absence was fatal, relying on CAS 2015/A/3896 to confirm that FIFA need not be summoned in horizontal disputes where it has no interest at stake. Second, she rejected the 'no contract' finding, reasoning that Article 1(2) of the Swiss CO permits tacit or conclusive expressions of will. She identified five conclusive acts: Chiwenga's mediation of both match contracts, extensive communications showing SAFA's consent, her identification as agent on FIFA Tier 1 Forms signed by SAFA, the matches taking place without objection, and SAFA's silence on the invoices. Third, she found SAFA's reliance on Article 46 of its statutes legally unfounded, holding that the article governs direct organisation by the association and does not bar a licensed match agent. She applied CAS 2019/A/6131 (Burahee v. Equatorial Guinea) to hold that SAFA could not benefit from the absence of a written contract it had itself caused. Fourth, on quantum, she noted SAFA never contested the invoice amounts, never disputed the work, and its Vice-President had assured payment. She therefore awarded the full invoiced sum of GBP 18,941 without examining the alternative Article 19.2 MAR claim, and applied the statutory 5% interest rate from 20 October 2024.

Why Chiwenga matters in CAS jurisprudence

Chiwenga reinforces the principle, first articulated in CAS 2019/A/6131 (Burahee), that a national association cannot invoke non-compliance with the formal requirements of the FIFA MAR (Articles 16–18) when it is itself responsible for the absence of a written mandate. It also clarifies that horizontal match-agency fee disputes do not require FIFA to be joined as a respondent, and confirms that conclusive acts suffice to establish a binding contract under Swiss law even in the absence of a signed document.

Cases cited in this award

CAS 2015/A/3896 Elias Mendes Trindade v. Club Atlético de Madrid CAS 2019/A/6131 Archad Burahee v. Equatorial Guinea Football Federation CAS 2008/A/1705 CAS 2008/A/1708 CAS 2010/A/2289 CAS 2014/A/3690

Frequently asked questions about Chiwenga

Did Chiwenga win her case against SAFA at CAS even without a signed mandate?

Yes. CAS Sole Arbitrator Maite Nadal Charco upheld Chiwenga's appeal and ordered SAFA to pay GBP 18,941 plus 5% annual interest from 20 October 2024. The arbitrator found that a valid contract existed through conclusive acts — including SAFA's consent to the match arrangements, its signature on FIFA Tier 1 Forms identifying Chiwenga as agent, and its silence on the invoices — even though no written mandate was ever signed.

Can a federation avoid paying a match agent by arguing the contract was not in writing as required by the FIFA MAR?

Not where the federation itself caused the absence of a written contract. In Chiwenga, CAS applied the principle commodum ex injuria sua nemo habere debet, citing CAS 2019/A/6131 (Burahee v. Equatorial Guinea), holding that SAFA could not benefit from the lack of a written mandate when it had repeatedly and without legal basis refused to sign the mandate Chiwenga provided. The arbitrator found SAFA's reliance on Article 46 of its own statutes to be legally unfounded.

Does FIFA need to be named as a respondent in a CAS appeal involving a match agent fee dispute?

No. The Sole Arbitrator in Chiwenga held that the dispute was a horizontal contractual matter between a match agent and a national association, not involving FIFA's disciplinary powers or membership decisions. Relying on CAS 2015/A/3896 (Trindade v. Atlético de Madrid), she confirmed that FIFA had no interest at stake and was not a necessary party, even though FIFA was offered the opportunity to intervene and declined.

What interest rate applies to unpaid match agent fees under Swiss law and from what date did it run in the Chiwenga case?

The statutory default interest rate of 5% per annum under Article 104(1) of the Swiss Code of Obligations applies. In Chiwenga, the arbitrator held that default arose when the invoices became payable upon receipt; she fixed the start date as 20 October 2024 — the day following the date the invoices were sent — and ordered interest to run until the date of effective payment.

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.