TAS Rules Against Dani Alves in Pumas Contract Dispute
The story of Dani Alves and Pumas has taken another dramatic turn, and this time, the outcome has landed squarely against the Brazilian star. The Tribunal Arbitral du Sport, better known as the Court of Arbitration for Sport or TAS, has issued a ruling that completely changes the direction of this long legal battle. On September 1, 2025, Pumas was officially notified that the TAS overturned a prior FIFA decision and sided with the Mexican club. What this means is that Alves is now required to pay the institution 2.25 million U.S. dollars, along with a five percent annual interest dating back to January 2023.
To put this into context, the original ruling by FIFA’s Dispute Resolution Chamber in May 2024 had favored Alves, essentially ordering that Pumas should compensate him after their contract was terminated. But Pumas appealed that decision to the highest sports tribunal, and TAS concluded that the club was justified in ending his contract. The termination had been carried out when Alves was detained in Barcelona over accusations of sexual assault, and from the tribunal’s perspective, this gave the club “just cause.”
Also Read:A key aspect of this case revolved around what has been called a “double contract.” On paper, Alves’ official salary filed with the Mexican federation was 300,000 dollars. However, the bulk of his income—around 90 percent—came through a parallel contract for image rights, amounting to 2.25 million dollars. This setup, common in football, was designed for fiscal reasons, but it became a focal point in the arbitration. According to sports lawyer Luis Jiménez, one of the biggest mistakes made by Alves’ defense was not challenging the tribunal’s authority to analyze the image rights contract. By failing to object early, the defense effectively allowed TAS to treat the image rights deal as part of the overall contractual framework, which reinforced Pumas’ position.
Now, while TAS has ordered Alves to pay, collecting that money will not be automatic. The ruling has legal force, but execution requires civil procedures in Spain, where Alves resides. These steps are supported by the New York Convention, which governs recognition of arbitral awards across countries. If Alves refuses, consequences could include sanctions within football activities and, eventually, court enforcement.
This decision also shines a spotlight on the practice of dual contracts in football. On the one hand, they can be seen as legitimate tax planning tools; on the other, they raise serious questions about transparency and legality. Jiménez noted that such agreements often benefit clubs and players fiscally but may draw scrutiny if exposed, particularly from tax authorities. In this case, the use of a parallel contract not only influenced the financial dispute but also opened discussions about potential double taxation between Mexico and Spain.
So, what we are seeing is more than just a clash between a player and his former club. The Dani Alves case is now a precedent for how just-cause terminations are handled in football, especially when off-field legal troubles arise. At the same time, it highlights the risks of financial structures that, while common in the sport, can become liabilities once they are brought into the public and legal arena.
Read More:
0 Comments