Foreigner Wins Arbitration but Still Unpaid, Court Rules。。。

Source: OT-Team(G)，光明网; 法治日报

  Recently, the Taizhou Intermediate People's Court in Jiangsu Province concluded the province's first case involving the recognition and enforcement of an arbitration award by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).

  In August 2017, Spanish football coach Garcia (pseudonym) signed a Head Coach Employment Contract with Taizhou Yuanda Company (pseudonym). The agreement appointed Garcia as the head coach. Yuanda also agreed to provide Garcia with multiple apartment options for accommodation. Furthermore, it was stipulated that Garcia would receive 50% of profits if the club commercially used his image. Both parties agreed that CAS, based in Switzerland, would serve as the final appellate institution for disputes.

  Conflicts later arose over team performance, player recruitment, and club operations. Yuanda failed to pay Garcia's agreed salary and benefits, leading to a contract dispute. Garcia filed for arbitration with FIFA's Player Status Committee, seeking remuneration, breach compensation, and interest. The committee partially ruled in Garcia's favor. Yuanda appealed to CAS, which upheld the original ruling. Yuanda did not comply with the award, prompting Garcia to apply to the Taizhou court for recognition and enforcement.

  After review, the court ruled to recognize and enforce the CAS decision. Judge Zhu Ximao explained that the CAS was established to resolve international sports disputes, including issues related to sports management, disciplinary actions, and financial conflicts. Under China's Civil Procedure Law, legally binding foreign arbitration awards require recognition and enforcement by a Chinese court. Parties may apply to the intermediate court where the respondent is located or where their assets are held.

  In this case, Garcia and Yuanda had agreed to designate CAS as the final appellate body. Since the CAS ruling was issued in Switzerland—a signatory of the New York Convention alongside China—Garcia's application to the Taizhou court for enforcement complied with legal requirements. Yuanda's failure to fulfill its obligations under the binding arbitration award led the court to uphold and enforce the CAS decision.