Originally from: 
Swiss International Arbitration Law Reports (SIALR) - 2008 Volume 2 No. 1

Preview Page

No. 6

X. v. A. Association and B. SASP
[The French Football Player Joining an English Club]
No. 4A_370/2007
Headnote
A preliminary or interlocutory award that implicitly rules on
arbitral jurisdiction must be challenged forthwith or any objections
to arbitral jurisdiction will be deemed waived.
Where a party challenges an award based on the non-arbitrability
of the subject matter of the dispute, such challenge must be made
prior to any defence on the merits or it will be deemed waived.
Objections based on lack of arbitrability underlie the same
principles as objections to arbitral jurisdiction as to the time when
they must be raised.
Summary of the Decision
X., a young French football player, in 2003 signed (i) a training
agreement with French football club B. for a three-year period ending on
30 June 2006 and (ii) a youth player’s contract for a period ending on 30
June 2004. The training agreement required, inter alia, B. to provide
athletic and educational training to X., after which X. would be required
to sign his first professional contract with B. In early August 2004, X.
signed a contract with English club Y. instead.
B. brought a claim before the FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber
(DRC) seeking (i) a declaration that X. was bound by the training
agreement (ii) a declaration that X. was bound to enter into an agreement
with B. and (iii) an order enjoining X. to refrain from playing football
with any other football club until his return to B. The DRC declared that
(i) it lacked jurisdiction as to claims arising under the training agreement,
(ii) it had jurisdiction as to claims arising under the youth player’s
contract, which had come to an end, and (iii) no order would be made as
there was no contract preventing X. from signing a contract with a non-
French club.
B. appealed the DRC decision to a CAS panel. The CAS panel made a
partial award annulling the DRC’s decision on jurisdiction, declaring that
X. had breached the training agreement and reserving a decision on
damages. The CAS panel then made a final award ordering X. to pay B.
EUR 545,812.00.