We are honored to share that our firm successfully represented Mr. Denis Klinar (the “Player”) in a litigation against agent Milomir Curcic and an agency from Andora MICU Strategy (the “Agents”).
Prior to the dispute, the Agents had been involved in the Player’s transfer from Olimpija (Slovenia) to Puskas Academy (Hungary), after which the parties signed a representation contract in Hungary.
Subsequently, the Player departed from the Hungarian club and found himself a new engagement in Maribor. However, he did so without an involvement of the Agents, which caused the latter to file a claim against him to the High Court in Novi Pazar, requesting damage compensation related to an alleged breach of the parties’ representation contract.
The contract was not notarized, which is a condition for formal validity under Serbian law. Additionally, the contract contained a clause which entitled the Agents to a penalty of EUR 200,000, in case the Player signed a contract with any club without their written permission. Finally, the Agents charged their services to the clubs involved in the Player’s transfers, which is incompatible with Serbian law.
The Agents defended their position by, inter alia, stating that that Hungarian law – which does not foresee notarization as condition for the validity – is applicable to the contractual form (lex loci actus, in favorem validatis), although the parties chose Serbian law to be applicable to the merits of the dispute.
The court in Novi Pazar ruled in the Agents’ favor twice in a very biased and suspicious manner.
However, our firm successfully appealed the judgements both times before the Court of Appeal in Kragujevac. In the final ruling, the court rejected the Agents’ claims and concluded that: (i) the provision from the Law on Sports which makes it mandatory for the player-agent contract to be notarized is loi d’application immediate and as such cannot be circumvented; (ii) if an agent charges his services to the club, he cannot enter into a representation contract with the player.
