Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) judge
passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 18 March 2014,
by Theo van Seggelen (Netherlands), DRC judge,
on the claim presented by the player,
Player I, from country N
as Claimant
against the club,
Club K, from country T
as Respondent
regarding an employment-related dispute
arisen between the parties
I.
Facts of the case
1.
On 4 September 2013, Player I, from country N (hereinafter: the Claimant) and
Club K, from country T (hereinafter: the Respondent) concluded an
employment contract (hereinafter: the contract) valid as from the date of
signature until 31 May 2014.
2.
In accordance with the contract, the Claimant was entitled to receive, inter
alia, the amount of USD 115,000 payable as follows:
a. USD 30,000 “to be paid as down payment”;
b. USD 85,000 payable in monthly installments of USD 9,440 “in the last
week of each month”.
3.
On 28 November 2013, the Claimant lodged a claim against the Respondent in
front of FIFA, which he amended on 10 December 2013, claiming the amount
of USD 67,760 corresponding to outstanding remuneration until December
2013, as well as USD 3,000 for legal fees.
4.
Despite having been invited by FIFA to provide its reply to the present matter,
the Respondent did not answer to the Claimant’s claim.
II.
Considerations of the DRC judge
1.
First of all, the DRC judge analysed whether he was competent to deal with
the case at hand. In this respect, he took note that the present matter was
submitted to FIFA on 28 November 2013. Consequently, the 2012 edition of
the Rules Governing the Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the
Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: the Procedural Rules) is applicable to
the matter at hand (cf. art. 21 of the 2012 edition of the Procedural Rules).
2.
Subsequently the DRC judge referred to art. 3 par. 2 and par. 3 of the
Procedural Rules and confirmed that in accordance with art. 24 par. 1 and par.
2 in conjunction with art. 22 lit. (b) of the Regulations on the Status and
Transfer of Players (edition 2012) he is competent to decide on the present
litigation, which concerns an employment-related dispute with an
international dimension between a country N player and a country T club.
3.
In particular, and in accordance with art. 24 par. 2 lit. i) of the Regulations on
the Status and Transfer of Players, the DRC judge confirmed that he may
Player I, from country N / Club K, from country T
2/5
adjudicate in the present dispute which value does not exceed currency of
country H 100,000.
4.
In continuation, the DRC judge analysed which edition of the FIFA Regulations
on the Status and Transfer of Players should be applicable as to the substance
of the matter. In this respect, he referred, on the one hand, to art. 26 par. 1
and 2 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2012),
and, on the other hand, to the fact that the present claim was lodged in front
of FIFA on 28 November 2013. The DRC judge concluded that the 2012 edition
of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (hereinafter: the
Regulations), is applicable to the matter at hand as to the substance.
5.
The competence of the DRC judge and the applicable regulations having been
established, the DRC judge entered into the substance of the matter. In doing
so, he started by acknowledging the abovementioned facts of the case as well
as the documentation contained in the file.
6.
In this respect, the DRC judge acknowledged that the parties to the dispute
had signed a valid employment contract on 4 September 2013, in accordance
with which the Respondent would pay the Claimant a total remuneration in
the amount of USD 115,000.
7.
Moreover, the DRC judge took into consideration that according to the
Claimant, the Respondent had failed to pay him his remuneration in the total
amount of USD 67,760. Consequently, the Claimant requested to be awarded
with the payment of the total amount of USD 67,760.
8.
Subsequently, the DRC judge noted that the Respondent failed to present its
response to the claim of the Claimant, in spite of having been invited to do so.
By not presenting its position to the claim, the DRC judge was of the opinion
that the Respondent renounced its right of defence and, thus, accepted the
allegations of the Claimant.
9.
Furthermore, as a consequence of the aforementioned consideration, the DRC
judge concurred that in accordance with art. 9 par. 3 of the Procedural Rules,
he shall take a decision upon the basis of the documentation already on file; in
other words, upon the statements and documents presented by the Claimant.
10.
Taking into account the documentation presented by the Claimant in support
of his petition, the DRC judge concluded that the Claimant had substantiated
his claim pertaining to outstanding remuneration with sufficient documentary
evidence.
11.
In this regard, the DRC judge determined that the total amount of USD
115,000 to which the Claimant was entitled to as per the employment contract,
should have been paid by the Respondent throughout a period of 9 months,
Player I, from country N / Club K, from country T
3/5
i.e. the Claimant was entitled to a “down payment” of USD 30,000 and to a
monthly salary of USD 9,440.
12.
On account of the aforementioned considerations, the DRC judge established
that the Respondent failed to remit the Claimant’s remuneration in the total
amount of USD 67,760 corresponding to the “down payment” and to 4
monthly salaries as from September 2013 until and including December 2013.
13.
Consequently, the DRC judge decided that, in accordance with the general
legal principle of pacta sunt servanda, the Respondent is liable to pay to the
Claimant outstanding remuneration in the total amount of USD 67,760.
14.
Finally, the DRC judge decided to reject the Claimant’s claim pertaining to
legal costs in accordance with art. 18 par. 4 of the Procedural Rules.
III.
Decision of the DRC judge
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Player I, is partially accepted.
2.
The Respondent, Club K, has to pay to the Claimant, within 30 days as from
the date of notification of this decision, the amount of USD 67,760.
3.
In the event that the aforementioned sum is not paid by the Respondent
within the stated time limit, interest at the rate of 5% p.a. will fall due as of
expiry of the aforementioned time limit and the present matter shall be
submitted, upon request, to FIFA’s Disciplinary Committee for consideration
and a formal decision.
4.
Any further claim lodged by the Claimant is rejected.
Player I, from country N / Club K, from country T
4/5
5.
The Claimant is directed to inform the Respondent immediately and directly of
the account number to which the remittance is to be made and to notify the
DRC judge of every payment received.
*****
Note relating to the motivated decision (legal remedy):
According to art. 67 par. 1 of the FIFA Statutes, this decision may be appealed
against before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The statement of appeal
must be sent to the CAS directly within 21 days of receipt of notification of this
decision and shall contain all the elements in accordance with point 2 of the
directives issued by the CAS, a copy of which we enclose hereto. Within another 10
days following the expiry of the time limit for filing the statement of appeal, the
appellant shall file a brief stating the facts and legal arguments giving rise to the
appeal with the CAS (cf. point 4 of the directives).
The full address and contact numbers of the CAS are the following:
Court of Arbitration for Sport
Avenue de Beaumont 2
1012 Lausanne
Switzerland
Tel: +41 21 613 50 00
Fax: +41 21 613 50 01
e-mail: [email protected]
www.tas-cas.org
For the DRC judge:
Jérôme Valcke
Secretary General
Encl. CAS directives
Player I, from country N / Club K, from country T
5/5