STN v POR

Facts

The claimant is a professional footballer and the defendant, of which Mr X is the sole director, was his agent. Their disputes were referred to arbitration under Rule K of the FA Rules before a sole arbitrator. The defendant claimed some £110,000 in unpaid commission on the claimant's 2022 transfer from Club 1 to Club 2. The claimant denied that claim and counterclaimed for breach of contract and fiduciary duty, seeking an account, an account of profits and/or equitable compensation. After a hearing in February 2025, the arbitrator's Partial Final Award of 15 April 2025 upheld the defendant's claim and dismissed the counterclaim. The claimant applied on 12 May 2025 under section 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996 to set the award aside. He advanced four grounds: failure to deal with a limb of the counterclaim alleging that the defendant allowed Club 1 to overpay on his transfer from Club 3; breach of the general duty in section 33 of the Arbitration Act 1996 over a mandate agreement with a Turkish agent, by reliance on the arbitrator's private knowledge and an unpleaded line of reasoning; failure to allow him to put his case on an alleged secret profit paid by Club 4; and failure to address the evidence of Ms XX. The defendant also said the first complaint was barred by section 70(2)(b) of the Arbitration Act 1996.