In February 2024, the Cluj-Napoca Court issued a final ruling in a case involving a sports law dispute between a sports management company, represented by our firm Gherdan and Associates SCA, and a Municipal Sports Club from the southern part of the country. The dispute concerned the payment of a penalty clause due to the failure to fulfill an intermediary obligation stipulated in the intermediary contract (Article 2.096 Civil Code) concluded between the two parties.
According to the clause between the parties, the Municipal Sports Club was obligated to extend the sports activity contract with a certain player through the intermediary company; otherwise, it owed a sum of money according to the penalty clause. Since the club did not fulfill its contractual obligation, the intermediary company sued the sports structure.
The main defense of the club was that no sports activity contract had been concluded between the club and the player, and the claimant agency did not prove the conclusion of this contract. This defense was deemed unfounded by the court, which upheld the intermediary company’s arguments that the provisions of Article 14 of Law no. 69/2000, corroborated with Article 1 letter i) of Government Decision no. 884/2001, establish the obligation to conclude a sports activity contract or an employment contract between the club and the athlete when the athlete is registered with a national sports federation. According to Article 1 letter i) of Government Decision no. 884/2001, registration is a bilateral legal act between a sports structure and an athlete, conferring mutual rights and obligations on both parties.
According to the final civil judgement no. 358/2024 issued by the Cluj-Napoca Court on February 7, 2024, in the case of professional athletes playing for a sports club, a presumption arises, according to Article 329 of the Civil Procedure Code, that a sports activity contract (CAS) or an employment contract (CIM) is concluded between them and the respective club.
Regarding the athlete ##### (formerly ####) ##### #######, the court notes that she played for CSM ######### in the ######### season, as evidenced by the statistical sheet available on the official website of the Romanian Basketball Federation, submitted on pages 85-87 of the case file. Therefore, the court finds that, with reference to the provisions of Article 14 of Law no. 69/2000, which states: (1) under the law and in accordance with the provisions of the statutes and regulations of national and international sports federations, performance athletes may be: a. Amateurs; b. Professionals. 1^1. Performance athletes conclude a sports activity contract with a sports structure, and considering that CS Municipal Târgoviște is a professional sports club participating in the #### National Women’s Basketball League, a well-known fact, the presumption arises, according to Article 329 of the Civil Procedure Code, that this athlete also had a sports activity contract or an employment contract based on which she played for the debtor. Therefore, the debtor’s arguments are contradicted by the entire body of evidence presented in the case.
In essence, the court correctly noted that all athletes participating in professional sports have concluded a sports activity contract or an employment contract with the club to which they are licensed.
