Why Tabraiz Shamsi took Cricket South Africa to court over NOC dispute?

South Africa's left-arm wrist spinner Tabraiz Shamsi recently took Cricket South Africa (CSA) to court regarding a dispute over a No Objection Certificate (NOC).

The 35-year-old was granted NOC to play for the Gulf Giants in the ILT20 until December 19, 2025 but an extension of the same was refused. The Gauteng High Court ruled in the player's favour, directing the board to extend the NOC until the end of the ILT20 2025 season on January 4, 2026 and cover his legal costs.

Why did Shamsi have to move court to seek NOC extension?

One might wonder how the issue landed up in the court of law. Incidentally, there had been no reported precedence, until this case, where a cricketer took their board to court over an NOC to play in franchise T20 leagues. So what compelled Shamsi to take such action?

To understand the reasons, one would have to start with knowing that Shamsi had opted out of his national contract with CSA in October 2024. Moreover, the Johannesburg-born did not even have a contract with any domestic team in South Africa. As a result, the spinner faced no restrictions and was free to explore opportunities in various T20 leagues around the world. But, as a matter of fact, he kept himself available for selection to the national team.

In September 2025, Shamsi was picked up by MI Cape Town in the SA20 auction for 500,000 Rands (USD 30,300 approx). The left-arm spinner, however, wanted a release from the contract in November due to personal reasons. The league accepted his request and the contract was repudiated. As it happens, the South African was duly replaced in the MICT squad by another left-arm wrist spinner Thomas Kaber.

Having no contract with any SA20 team, Shamsi was free to seek playing opportunities elsewhere. The veteran then signed up to play for the Gulf Giants in the ILT20 2025. As is the ICC rule, the players are mandated to produce NOCs from their home boards to play in a domestic tournament or a franchise league abroad.

Though Shamsi did receive an NOC for his participation in the UAE-based T20 league it was only until December 19, 2025. As mentioned above, the tournament ran until the first week of January and so the then existing arrangement would have jeopardised the spinner's participation in the second half of the current edition.

Discussions between CSA and the player did not yield a desired result for the latter and so Shamsi approached the High Court for an "urgent interim relief". The court ordered the CSA to extend the NOC until the culmination of the ILT20 on January 4, 2026.

CSA obliged and, moreover, granted the bowler a separate NOC for participation in BBL 2025-26. Notably, Shamsi will turn up for Adelaide Strikers from early January and his NOC for this purpose runs until the final day of the ongoing edition.

The key aspect to note is the left-armer did not have a national or domestic contract and, more importantly, not even one with any SA20 franchise. Thus, it appears that the court felt there was no reason for cutting his ILT20 stint short, and so, based on the same rationale CSA perhaps decided to grant him NOC for his upcoming BBL duties.

"I am grateful that the Court recognized the urgency of my situation and granted interim relief. I was reluctant to take this matter to court, but it became necessary to bring certainty and resolve a situation that could not be resolved in any other way. This was never about maximising opportunities, but being able to approach my career in a considered and sustainable way," Shamsi said in a statement.

The court's ruling in Shamsi's case holds significance for players, especially free agents, who wish to ply their trade in overseas leagues. NOC disputes have occurred before in several countries but no issue has found its way to the courts.

Boards are generally hesitant to grant NOCs to players when their own domestic season is underway. However, with this judgement would we now see similar litigations from affected players in other countries too?