Al-Ain FC v. Danilo Arboleda Hurtado

Colombian defender Danilo Arboleda joined Emirati club Al-Ain from Moldovan side Sheriff on 7 January 2022. On 15 December 2022, Al-Ain sent Arboleda, through his agent Augustine Lorenzetti, an offer to extend his contract by a further two seasons. Arboleda maintained he signed and returned it; Al-Ain disputed ever receiving a countersigned copy. On 9 May 2023, the club paid Arboleda USD 200,000 by cheque, a payment whose purpose the parties disputed — Al-Ain characterised it as a loan or salary advance unrelated to any extension, while the surrounding conduct pointed the other way.

That surrounding conduct became central to the case. In early June 2023, Al-Ain publicly announced on social media that Arboleda would join its 2023/24 pre-season training camp in Spain. Between 20 and 23 June 2023, Arboleda travelled to London for a medical examination connected to his recovery from injury. Then, on 9 July 2023, the club approached Arboleda's agent to say it intended to send him on loan to Qatari club Al-Ahli for the 2023/24 season — an approach that only makes sense if Al-Ain itself still believed it held contractual rights over him. The agent rejected the loan on Arboleda's behalf; the following day, 10 July 2023, Al-Ain reversed position, telling the player his contract had never been extended because the draft had not been signed and accepted. Arboleda was released from Al-Ain on 14 July 2023 and moved to Al-Ahli in Qatar shortly after.

Because no single, undisputed signed extension document existed, the Sole Arbitrator, Rui Botica Santos, had to infer whether an extension was genuinely agreed from this conduct and its surrounding circumstances, agreeing with the FIFA DRC that two elements carried particular weight: the club's clear and consistent interest in Arboleda right up to his 14 July release, and its own attempt to loan him out in early July, since a club does not try to loan out a player whose contract it does not believe still runs. On that basis, the Arbitrator found a genuine two-season extension had been agreed.

On compensation, the panel applied the standard mitigation approach: the amount Al-Ain owed for breaching the extended contract is reduced by the gross value of whatever Arboleda subsequently earned — here, from a run of contracts in Qatar, China and Kuwait — less any agent's commission he had to pay to secure that new employment. The appeal was partially upheld to reflect this recalculation, with costs split two-thirds to the club and one-third to the player, and Al-Ain ordered to pay the player a further CHF 5,000.