Football manager contracts refer to the relationship established based on a contract between a football player or sports club and a manager. In Article 2 of the Football Managers’ Working Instruction published by the Turkish Football Federation, a manager is more clearly defined as a real person licensed by the Turkish Football Federation who represents football players or clubs for the purpose of negotiating professional football player contracts for a certain fee or free of charge, or who represents clubs for the purpose of negotiating transfers between clubs. According to the same article of the Instruction, football manager contracts are expressed as a written contract to be signed by managers with the football player or club, a sample of which was prepared by the TFF.

As can be clearly understood from the aforementioned legal provision, football manager contracts are signed between the manager and the football player or sports club. The validity of manager contracts is subject to certain conditions according to the Instruction. First of all, the contract must be established in writing. In addition, the scope of the relationship must be outlined in the contract. It should be noted that the contract can be made for a maximum of two years. The records stating that the contract will automatically renew after the two years are invalid. After the two years are over, the parties who want to continue the contractual relationship must create a new contract that does not exceed two years. There are different views in the doctrine regarding the legal nature of a football agent contract that meets the conditions of validity. However, according to the dominant view in the doctrine, football agent contracts are anonymous contracts. The Court of Cassation has made different qualifications in various decisions:[1]

The 13th Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals, in its Merits No. 2013/15789 and Decision No. 2014/16309;

According to the content of the file examined, there is a valid Brokerage Agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant in accordance with Article 520 of the Code of Obligations, and it goes without saying that the broker may demand a fee if the work he/she performs is converted into a contract.

The 19th Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals, in its Merits No. 2014/18896 and Decision No. 2015/6729;

Since the dispute arises from the Football Player Management Commission Agreement and the defendant’s title, the appeal review of the file is outside the jurisdiction of our Chamber and falls within the jurisdiction of the High 13th Civil Chamber.

As can be seen, the Supreme Court of Appeals accepts the legal nature of football player management agreements as Brokerage Agreements in some of its decisions, while it describes them as Commission Agreements in some of its decisions.

In order to eliminate the controversial nature of football player management contracts, the following provision has been added to Article 13 of the Working Instructions with Football Managers:

In terms of transparency, football players and clubs are obliged to state in the management contract the legal nature of the legal relationship they have with managers, i.e. whether this relationship is a service, consultancy, representation or another legal relationship.

Therefore, the obligation to state the nature of the legal relationship arising from the management contract imposed on football players and clubs in the contract and the discussions regarding the nature of the contract have become unimportant. In fact, every contract will produce its results in accordance with the legal qualification it provides.

With the legal nature of the contractual relationship being stated in the management contract, the conflict of interest frequently encountered in disputes regarding management contracts will also produce its results according to the legal nature of the contract. For example, if the manager of a club knows about the injury of the football player the club wants to sign a contract with but does not inform the club authorities about this situation and a contract is signed between the club and the football player but it is later revealed that the football player is injured, then the conflict of interest comes to the fore at this point.[2]

If it is stated that the football player management contract is a brokerage contract, the provisions of Article 520 and the following of the Turkish Code of Obligations will be applied in the event of a conflict of interest. According to the provisions in question; A brokerage contract is a contract in which the broker undertakes to prepare or mediate the establishment of a contract between the parties and is entitled to a fee in the event of the establishment of this contract. However, it should be noted immediately that the most important difference between a management contract and a brokerage contract is that the broker only mediates the contract, while the manager can make a contract on behalf of the football player, depending on the situation.[3] If the broker acts in the interest of the other party by acting contrary to the obligation he has undertaken or receives a promise of a fee from the other party contrary to the rules of honesty, he loses his rights regarding the fee and the expenses he has incurred. Therefore, in the event of a conflict of interest in a management contract whose legal nature is determined as a brokerage contract, the manager will lose his fee and other rights.

In a management contract determined as a brokerage contract, the provisions of Article 532 and the following of the Turkish Code of Obligations will come into play. In this context, if a conflict of interest arises, the dispute will be resolved within the framework of the ‘other commission works’ provision.

Finally, the parties may agree that the provisions regarding the agency contract will be applied to the management contract. In this case, if a conflict of interest occurs, the provisions of Article 502 and the following of the Turkish Code of Obligations will be applied. In other words, the agency contract is a contract in which the agent undertakes to perform a task or transaction of the principal. The agent is obliged to carry out the work and services he undertakes with loyalty and care, considering the legitimate interests of the principal. Therefore, the manager must act in the interest of the football player or sports club he manages and perform his management activities with care. Otherwise, he will be responsible for the breach of the duty of care.

REFERENCE

Doğu, H. M. (2018). Futbolcu menajerliği sözleşmesinde menfaat çatışması. Marmara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Hukuk Araştırmaları Dergisi, 24(1), 400-414.

The 13th Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals, Merits No. 2013/15789 and Decision No. 2014/16309

The 19th Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals, Merits No. 2014/18896 and Decision No. 2015/6729

Football Managers’ Working Instructions (published by the Turkish Football Federation) and Related Legislation

[1] Doğu, H. M. (2018). Futbolcu menajerliği sözleşmesinde menfaat çatışması. Marmara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Hukuk Araştırmaları Dergisi, 24(1), 400-414.

[2] Doğu, H. M. (2018). Futbolcu menajerliği sözleşmesinde menfaat çatışması. Marmara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Hukuk Araştırmaları Dergisi, 24(1), 400-414.

[3] Doğu, H. M. (2018). Futbolcu menajerliği sözleşmesinde menfaat çatışması. Marmara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Hukuk Araştırmaları Dergisi, 24(1), 400-414.