ETHICS BONUS CLAUSES IN FOOOTBALLERS’ EMPLOYMENT CONTRACTS
Recent litigation involving Kylian Mbappé has brought renewed public attention to the use of so-called “ethics bonus” clauses in professional footballers’ employment contracts.
Designed to align sporting excellence with behavioural standards, these clauses raise complex questions at the intersection of labour law and sports regulation. Typically structured as variable remuneration, an ethics bonus conditions part of the player’s compensation on compliance with predefined standards of conduct, both on and off the pitch. These standards may relate to public statements, social media activity, adherence to club values, or broader expectations of exemplary behaviour befitting a highly visible athlete.
In this context, on 16 December 2025, the Paris Labour Court ordered Paris Saint-Germain FC to pay €60.9 million (around Sw. Frs. 56.57 million) to Mbappé in respect of unpaid salary and bonus components at the expiry of the player’s fixed-term contract, whilst dismissing the club’s counterclaims.
More broadly, in France, such clauses form a well-established contractual practice in elite sport.
Under French law, the employment relationship between professional athletes and clubs is governed by a specific statutory framework, under which employment contracts must take the form of a fixed-term contract (contrat de travail à durée déterminée – CDD) governed by Article L222-2-1of the French Sports Code. Pursuant to Article L222-2-3 of the French Sports Code, any contract by which a sports association or sports company secures, for remuneration, the services of a professional athlete or coach must be concluded as a fixed-term employment contract, in order to ensure both the protection of athletes and the fairness of sporting competitions.
Within this statutory framework, the structure of professional athletes’ remuneration is further governed by the National Collective Bargaining Agreement for Sport (Convention collective nationale du sport – CCNS) of 7 July 2005, extended by Ministerial Order of 21 November 2006 and published on Legifrance). Pursuant to Article 12.6 of the CCNS, the employee’s remuneration must include a fixed salary and any benefits in kind expressly valued in the employment contract and must, in all cases, comply with the applicable minimum thresholds.
In addition, remuneration may include variable components, notably bonuses linked to compliance with ethical rules (ethics bonuses – primes d’éthique) and, for players, bonuses linked to attendance and participation within the club (attendance bonuses – primes d’assiduité).
The CCNS expressly recognises the possibility of such ethics-related bonuses, whilst leaving the determination of their conditions of attribution to the employment contract or the club’s internal regulations, subject to compliance with applicable collective agreements. More generally, the CCNS requires that any individual element of remuneration agreed between the parties or guaranteed by the employer be included in the employment contract (or specified in an addendum, where applicable) and expressed as a gross amount.
Importantly, where remuneration elements are subject to conditions, their attribution must be based on precise and objective criteria, defined either by the employment contract, a company-level agreement, or an express unilateral decision of the club.
The development of such clauses must also be understood in light of a fundamental principle of French labour law. Pursuant to Article L1331-2 of the Labour Code, financial penalties and other pecuniary sanctions are prohibited, and any contractual provision to the contrary is deemed unwritten. As a result, clubs cannot lawfully impose fines or wage deductions as disciplinary measures.
From a legal standpoint, ethics bonus clauses do not constitute an autonomous category under French law. Their legal treatment depends upon their structure and mode of application.
Where they are drafted as elements of remuneration and the contractual conditions for payment are fulfilled, they may be treated as salary components. By contrast, where their application overlaps with disciplinary processes or introduces discretionary or punitive effects, enforceability issues may arise.
The recent dispute highlights the contractual sensitivity of such clauses in professional football, particularly at a time when players’ contracts increasingly incorporate reputational, commercial and behavioural considerations alongside sporting performance, and make remuneration contingent upon compliance with defined professional standards, including respect for the club’s image, adherence to sporting regulations, appropriate conduct both on and off the pitch, and proper engagement with supporters.
For clubs and athletes alike, these developments underscore the importance of careful drafting, clear articulation within disciplinary frameworks, and consistent implementation in order to preserve legal certainty and limit litigation risk. Poorly drafted clauses may expose clubs to disputes, recharacterisation of remuneration, or even invalidation before labour courts or arbitral bodies. By contrast, well-calibrated and defined ethics clauses can serve as effective risk-management tools, balancing commercial imperatives with respect for players’ rights.
As football continues to be a major global entertainment industry, ethics bonus clauses are likely to remain a focal point of contractual innovation and litigation. Their growing use calls for sophisticated legal drafting and a nuanced understanding of both employment law and the specificities of professional sport.
We act in footballers’ employment contracts, including disputes, and further information is available from either Dr Estelle Ivanova or Dr Lucien Valloni by emailing them at ivanova@valloni.ch and valloni@valloni.ch respectively.