{"id":14686,"date":"2026-09-12T02:57:57","date_gmt":"2026-09-12T00:57:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.sportslawhub.com\/?p=14686"},"modified":"2026-09-12T02:58:48","modified_gmt":"2026-09-12T00:58:48","slug":"deporte-derecho-y-valores-asi-vivimos-nuestra-jornada-sobre-etica-proteccion-e-impacto-positivo-en-barcelona","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.sportslawhub.com\/es\/deporte-derecho-y-valores-asi-vivimos-nuestra-jornada-sobre-etica-proteccion-e-impacto-positivo-en-barcelona\/","title":{"rendered":"Deporte, Derecho y Valores: as\u00ed vivimos nuestra jornada sobre \u00c9tica, Protecci\u00f3n e Impacto Positivo en Barcelona"},"content":{"rendered":"\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\"Cas
Cas Matuzalem Case<\/figcaption><\/figure>

The Matuzalem case<\/strong> (CAS 2008\/A\/1519 & 1520<\/em>) represents a historic turning point in international sports law. It redefined how financial compensation is calculated for unilateral contract termination without just cause under Article 17 of the FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (RSTP).<\/p>

Furthermore, the subsequent ruling by the Swiss Federal Supreme Court (4A_558\/2011<\/em>) established a unprecedented boundary: a Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) award can be annulled if it violates substantive public policy (ordre public<\/em>).<\/p>

1. Background and factual matrix<\/strong><\/h2>

In 2004, Brazilian midfielder Francelino Matuzal\u00e9m signed a five-year employment contract with Ukrainian club FC Shakhtar Donetsk.<\/p>

In July 2007, after the expiration of the three-year protected period, Matuzal\u00e9m unilaterally terminated his contract without just cause. Shortly after, he signed with Spanish club Real Zaragoza, which had agreed to indemnify the player for any financial consequences resulting from his departure.<\/p>

Shakhtar Donetsk filed a claim before the FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) seeking over \u20ac25 million in compensation for breach of contract.<\/p>

2. The CAS award: moving beyond the Webster precedent<\/strong><\/h2>

In November 2007, FIFA\u2019s DRC awarded Shakhtar \u20ac6.8 million in compensation, holding Matuzal\u00e9m and Real Zaragoza jointly and severally liable. Both parties appealed the decision to the CAS.<\/p>

In its award dated 19 May 2009, the CAS panel drastically increased the compensation to \u20ac11,858,934<\/strong>.<\/p>

This decision marked a clear departure from the earlier Webster case<\/strong> (CAS 2007\/A\/1298<\/em>), which calculated compensation based primarily on the residual value of the player’s remaining salary. In Matuzalem<\/em>, the panel held that compensation under Article 17 RSTP must reflect the actual damage suffered by the club, incorporating:<\/p>