国际足联季度报告CAS-2026年1月版

QUARTERLY REPORT ON CAS FootballAwards Content Disclaimer Court of Arbitration for Sport Court of Arbitration for Sport Dispute ResolutionChamber CAS 2025/A/11857 A v. B & FIFA Reference number:CAS 2025/A/11857Award date:23 December 2025Seat of arbitration:Lausanne, Switzerland CATEGORY Main issue Does the club meet the requirements for the grant of a stay?No, the club does not meet the requirements. RELEVANT RULES & REGULATIONSCAS Code; art. R37PILA; art. 183 CASE LAW CITED »Irreparable harm, burden of proof:CAS2005/A/916; CAS 2014/A/3642; CAS 2020/A/7310;CAS 2023/A/9943; CAS 2023/A/10091; CAS2025/A/11319.»Irreparable harm, requirements:CAS 2014/A/3642.»Request for stay, irreparable harm test:CAS2007/A/1370-1376; CAS 2008/A/1630.»Request for stay, requirements:CAS 2001/A/324;CAS 2002/A/378; CAS 2003/O/486; TAS 2004/A/708-709; CAS 2004/A/780; CAS 2006/A/1088;CAS 2007/A/1370-1376; CAS 2007/A/1403; TAS2007/A/1397; CAS 2010/A/2071. Background The player and the club signed an employment agreement on 13 August 2023.The club loaned out the player to an Iranian club on the same date for a full season.Upon returning from his loan spell, the player sent a formal notice to the clubregarding an alleged deregistration of his employment contract and his exclusionfrom the training sessions of the club. The club failed to reply to this letter. Before the FIFA Football TribunalDispute Resolution Chamber /13 November 2024:player filed claim/6 June 2025:decision rendered The player entered into negotiations with a second Iranian club on 28 August2024. In addition, the player sent a further formal notice to the club on 1 September2024, reiterating his position. Yet again, the club failed to reply to this letter.The player signed a new employment agreement with a third Iranian club on 17September 2024 and, subsequently, amended the duration of the contractualrelationship. Before the Court of Arbitration forSport The player filed a claim before the FIFA DRC against the club for breach of contracton 13 November 2024, requesting compensation. The FIFA DRC rendered itsdecision on 6 June 2025, partially accepting the player’s claim. /20 October 2025:club filed statement ofappeal/20 October 2025:club requested stay/4 November 2025:FIFA objected/9 November 2025:player objected/23 December 2025:CAS AppealsArbitration Division deputy presidentissued order The club filed its appeal with CAS, requesting provisional measures. The playerand FIFA objected. CAS 2025/A/11857 A v. B & FIFA MAIN LEGAL FINDINGS The CAS Appeals Arbitration Division deputy president decided that the request for provisional measure filed by theclub is dismissed. Main issue The CAS Appeals Arbitration Division deputy president reasons that an international arbitral tribunal in Switzerlandis empowered by PILA art. 183 to order provisional or conservatory measures at the request of one party. The divisionpresident is competent to consider an application for a stay by a party in accordance with CAS Code art. R37. In addition, the CAS Division president or deputy president must consider the following factors: (i) whether the stayrequested is necessary to protect the applicant from irreparable harm; (ii) whether the applicant has reasonable chancesto succeed on the merits; and (iii) whether the interests of the applicant outweigh those of the opposite parties and ofthird parties. As such, the applicant must demonstrate that the requested stay is necessary to protect its position from damage orrisks that would be impossible, or very difficult, to remedy or cancel at a later stage to meet the irreparable harm test. Theapplicant must demonstrate that its position is not obviously groundless and that it has reasonable chances eventually towin the case to meet the likelihood of success test. Moreover, the applicant must demonstrate that the harm or inconvenience it would suffer from the refusal of the requestedstay would be comparatively greater than the harm or inconvenience other parties would suffer from the granting of theprovisional measures. These three requirements for the grant of a stay are cumulative. As such, general allegations of potential harm do not suffice to establish irreparable harm without any concrete evidenceto justify damage or potential damage. In addition, registration bans imposed on football clubs do not constitute a risk ofirreparable harm automatically simply because a club is banned from registering new players. A speculative future thatmay or may not materialize is a mere hypothetical scenario devoid of proof. The CAS Appeals Arbitration Division deputy president notes that the club received the grounds of the FIFA DRC decisionon 30 September 2025 and did not file its appeal until 20 October 2025. Moreover, it requested extensions of its time limitto file its appeal brief, representing an additional extension amounting to 38 days. The club also did not request expeditedproceedings. As such, the club self-inflic