CAS Case Digest · Verified against the full award text

CAS 2025/A/11761 — Mahamadou Kouyate v. Malian Football Federation (FEMAFOOT) & AS Real de Bamako

"Kouyate v. FEMAFOOT" · CAS declared inadmissible a Malian player's appeal because he failed to exhaust FEMAFOOT's internal remedies before approaching CAS.

What happened in Kouyate v. FEMAFOOT

Mahamadou Kouyate, a Malian professional footballer, signed a two-year employment contract with AS Real de Bamako on 6 August 2024. On 4 February 2025, the club unilaterally terminated the contract without just cause. Kouyate filed a claim before FEMAFOOT's 'Dispute Resolution Chamber' on 14 April 2025. FEMAFOOT's Secretary General, acting on behalf of the Executive Committee, replied on 30 June 2025 (the '30 June Letter'), stating the federation had nothing to do with the dispute and directing the player to seek recourse elsewhere. After further unanswered notices, Kouyate filed a CAS appeal on 9 September 2025, represented by FIFPRO, alleging denial of justice and seeking CFA 2,600,000 in compensation from the club and CFA 6,900,000 from FEMAFOOT. The Sole Arbitrator held that the 30 June Letter constituted a decision of the FEMAFOOT Executive Committee with animus decidendi, which Kouyate was required to appeal internally before the Central Appeals Committee (CAC) within eight days under Article 42(2) RAS. Because Kouyate never lodged that internal appeal, the CAS appeal was declared inadmissible. The case matters because it confirms that a federation's letter declining jurisdiction is itself an appealable decision, and players must exhaust all internal remedies — including appealing such letters — before accessing CAS.

Procedural history of CAS 2025/A/11761

On 6 August 2024, Kouyate and AS Real de Bamako concluded a two-year employment contract. The club terminated it without just cause on 4 February 2025. On 14 April 2025, Kouyate filed a claim before FEMAFOOT's 'Dispute Resolution Chamber'. FEMAFOOT's Secretary General, on behalf of the Executive Committee, issued the 30 June Letter declining jurisdiction. After further unanswered notices on 8 July 2025 and 6 August 2025, Kouyate filed a Statement of Appeal with CAS on 9 September 2025 under Articles R47 and R48 of the CAS Code, seeking a finding of denial of justice, compensation of CFA 2,600,000 from the club, and CFA 6,900,000 from FEMAFOOT. FEMAFOOT objected to CAS jurisdiction, arguing internal remedies had not been exhausted. The Second Respondent filed no answer and did not attend the hearing held on 26 March 2026.

Key holdings in CAS 2025/A/11761

• The 30 June Letter, issued by FEMAFOOT's Executive Committee and signed by the Secretary General, constitutes a decision within the meaning of Article R47 of the CAS Code because it has animus decidendi and affected the Appellant's legal position by declining jurisdiction over his claim.
• The form of a communication — including that it is styled as a letter — does not preclude it from constituting an appealable decision; what matters is its contents.
• A federation's letter declining jurisdiction and directing a party to seek recourse elsewhere is a final decision on inadmissibility, equivalent to a ruling that no further internal recourse exists within that body.
• The exhaustion of internal legal remedies under Article R47 of the CAS Code goes to admissibility rather than jurisdiction, consistent with the intent of the parties to exclude state courts.
• Because Kouyate failed to appeal the 30 June Letter before FEMAFOOT's Central Appeals Committee within eight days as required by Article 42(2) RAS, his CAS appeal is inadmissible.

How the CAS panel reasoned

The Sole Arbitrator first resolved the threshold question of whether the exhaustion-of-remedies requirement and the characterisation of the 30 June Letter go to jurisdiction or admissibility, concluding both are admissibility matters, following CAS 2021/A/8034. He then applied settled CAS jurisprudence — including CAS 2015/A/4162, CAS 2007/A/1251, CAS 2004/A/748, and CAS 2014/A/3744 & 3766 — holding that the form of a communication is irrelevant; what matters is whether it contains a ruling with animus decidendi that affects the addressee's legal position. The 30 June Letter was issued by the Executive Committee (a competent FEMAFOOT body), signed by the Secretary General (who the First Respondent confirmed signs Executive Committee decisions), declined jurisdiction, and directed the player to go elsewhere — precisely the conduct CAS 2007/A/1251 identified as a final decision on lack of jurisdiction. The Arbitrator rejected the Appellant's late argument at the hearing that his 8 July 2025 letter constituted an internal appeal, finding its title and contents showed it was merely another request for the federation to process the claim, not a formal appeal. He also noted the Appellant was professionally represented by FIFPRO Africa throughout, weighing against any excuse for procedural error.

Why Kouyate v. FEMAFOOT matters in CAS jurisprudence

This award reinforces that a national federation's letter declining jurisdiction over a player's claim is itself an appealable decision with animus decidendi, not a mere administrative communication. It confirms that players — especially those professionally represented — must appeal such letters through the federation's internal appellate bodies (here, the CAC within eight days under Article 42(2) RAS) before accessing CAS. The case also settles, for this panel, that both the characterisation of a communication as a decision and the exhaustion-of-remedies requirement under Article R47 of the CAS Code are matters of admissibility, not jurisdiction.

Cases cited in this award

CAS 2021/A/8444 CAS 2021/A/8034 CAS 2024/A/10414 CAS 2015/A/4162 CAS 2015/A/4203 CAS 2014/A/3744 & 3766

Frequently asked questions about Kouyate v. FEMAFOOT

Why was Kouyate's CAS appeal against FEMAFOOT declared inadmissible even though FEMAFOOT refused to hear his case?

The Sole Arbitrator found that FEMAFOOT's 30 June 2025 letter, signed by the Secretary General on behalf of the Executive Committee, was itself a decision with animus decidendi — it declined jurisdiction and directed Kouyate to seek recourse elsewhere. Under Article 42(2) of FEMAFOOT's RAS, Kouyate was required to appeal that decision before the Central Appeals Committee within eight days. Because he never filed that internal appeal, the CAS appeal was inadmissible for failure to exhaust internal remedies under Article R47 of the CAS Code.

Does a federation letter declining jurisdiction count as an appealable 'decision' under CAS rules?

Yes, according to this award. The Sole Arbitrator applied settled CAS jurisprudence — including CAS 2015/A/4162 and CAS 2007/A/1251 — holding that the form or title of a communication is irrelevant; what matters is whether it contains a ruling that affects the addressee's legal position. The 30 June Letter, issued by FEMAFOOT's Executive Committee and directing Kouyate to go elsewhere, had animus decidendi and therefore qualified as a decision subject to internal appeal.

What compensation was Kouyate seeking and did CAS award anything?

Kouyate sought CFA 2,600,000 net (16 months' residual salary at CFA 200,000 per month, mitigated by CFA 600,000 earned under a new contract) plus 5% interest per annum from 3 February 2025 against the club, and CFA 6,900,000 plus 5% interest per annum against FEMAFOOT for denial of justice, plus moral damages of CFA 1,000,000. CAS awarded nothing; the appeal was declared inadmissible and all claims were dismissed without examination of the merits.

Is the exhaustion of internal remedies a question of CAS jurisdiction or admissibility in this case?

The Sole Arbitrator held it is a matter of admissibility, not jurisdiction, following CAS 2021/A/8034 and CAS 2023/A/10055. The reasoning was that the clear intent of parties to an arbitration agreement is to exclude state courts, including where internal remedies have not been exhausted, so the failure to exhaust remedies does not deprive CAS of jurisdiction but renders the appeal inadmissible.

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.