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 (the Netherlands), DRC judge,
on the claim presented by the player,
Player A, country B
as Claimant
against the club,
Club C, country D
as Respondent
regarding an employment-related dispute
between the parties
I.
Facts of the case
1.
On 1 February 2011, the player from country B, Player A (hereinafter: player or
Claimant), and the club from country D, Club C (hereinafter: club or Respondent),
signed an employment contract valid as from 1 February 2011 until 31 January 2012
(hereinafter: the first contract). This contract included an annexe entitled ‘Special
Terms and Conditions of the Professional Contract’ (hereinafter: the first annexe),
valid for the same period as the first contract.
2.
In accordance with the first annexe, the player was inter alia entitled to receive
monthly remuneration of EUR 1,200 for the duration of the first contract, and a
monthly bonus of EUR 1,300.
3.
Equally, on 22 February 2012, the player and the club signed a second employment
contract valid as from 22 February 2012 until 31 July 2012 (hereinafter: the second
contract). This contract included an annexe entitled ‘Special Provisions of the
Professional Agreement’ (hereinafter: the second annexe), valid for the same period
as the second contract.
4.
Similarly, in accordance with the second annexe, the player was inter alia entitled to
receive monthly remuneration of EUR 1,200 for the duration of the second contract,
and a monthly bonus of EUR 1,300.
5.
On 1 December 2013, the player lodged a claim in front of FIFA against the club
asking that he be paid outstanding remuneration relating to the first contract, in
the amount of EUR 5,000, and the second contract in the amount of EUR 12,500,
plus interest at the rate of 5% p.a.
6.
The player claims that certain payments due in accordance with the first annexe
were never received. He claims to still be owed the payments:
a. for December 2011, the sum of EUR 2,500; and,
b. for January 2012, the sum of EUR 2,500.
7.
Additionally, the player claims that certain payments due in accordance with the
second annexe were never received. He claims to still be owed the payments:
a. for March 2012, the sum of EUR 2,500;
b. for April 2012, the sum of EUR 2,500;
c. for May 2012, the sum of EUR 2,500;
d. for June 2012, the sum of EUR 2,500; and,
e. for July 2012, the sum of EUR 2,500.
Player A, country B / Club C, country D
2/5
8.
The player claims to have had multiple discussions with club representatives who
have promised the debt would be settled.
9.
In spite of having been invited by FIFA to provide its position regarding the claim,
the club did not respond to the claim or make any statements during the course of
the investigation.
II.
Considerations of the DRC judge
1.
First, the DRC judge analysed whether he was competent to deal with the matter at
hand. In this respect, he took note that the present matter was submitted to FIFA on
1 December 2013. Consequently, the Rules Governing the Procedures of the Players’
Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber (edition 2012; hereinafter:
Procedural Rules) are applicable to the matter at hand (cf. art. 21 par. 1 and par. 2
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 combination
with art. 22 lit. b of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (edition
2012) he is competent to deal with the matter at stake, which concerns an
employment-related dispute with an international dimension between a player
from country B and a club from country D.
3.
Furthermore, the DRC judge analysed which regulations should be applicable as to
the substance of the matter. In this respect he confirmed that in accordance with
art. 26 par. 1 and 2 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (edition
2012), and considering that the present claim was lodged on 1 December 2013, the
2012 edition of said regulations (hereinafter: Regulations) is applicable to the
matter at hand as to the substance.
4.
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 as well as the arguments and
documentation submitted by the parties. The DRC judge, however, emphasised that
in the following considerations he will refer only to the facts, arguments and
documentary evidence, which he considered pertinent for the assessment of the
matter at hand.
5.
In this respect, the DRC judge acknowledged that the parties to the dispute had
signed two subsequent employment contracts on 1 February 2011 and 22 February
2012 respectively, in accordance with which the Respondent would pay monthly
remuneration of EUR 1,200 and a monthly bonus of EUR 1,300 to the Claimant as
from 1 February 2011 until 31 July 2012.
Player A, country B / Club C, country D
3/5
6.
In continuation, the DRC judge noted that the Claimant alleged that the
Respondent had failed to pay the outstanding amount of EUR 5,000 in relation to
the first employment contract, and EUR 12,500 in relation to the second contract.
Consequently, the Claimant asked to be awarded with the payment of the total
amount of EUR 17,500, plus interest.
7.
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.
8.
Furthermore, as a consequence of the aforementioned consideration, the DRC judge
held 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.
9.
The DRC judge took into consideration that according to the Claimant, the
Respondent had failed to pay his remuneration of December 2011 and January 2012
as well as of March until and including July 2012, in the amount of EUR 2,500 per
month. Consequently, the Claimant requested to be awarded with the payment of
the total amount of EUR 17,500.
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.
With respect to the Claimant’s monthly remuneration, the DRC judge highlighted
that since there was no other indication in the relevant employment contract, he
departed from the presumption that the monthly payment fell due by the end of
the month in which the player rendered his services to the club.
12.
On account of all of the above, 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 EUR 17,500 relating to
the period as from December 2011 until July 2012.
13.
In addition, taking into account the Claimant’s request as well as the constant
practice of the Dispute Resolution Chamber, the DRC judge decided that the
Respondent must pay to the Claimant interest of 5% p.a. on the amount of EUR
17,500 as from 1 December 2013 until the date of effective payment.
Player A, country B / Club C, country D
4/5
III.
Decision of the DRC judge
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Player A, is accepted.
2.
The Respondent, Club C, has to pay to the Claimant, within 30 days as from the date
of notification of this decision, the amount of EUR 17,500 plus 5% interest p.a. as from
1 December 2013 until the date of effective payment.
3.
In the event that the aforementioned sum plus interest is not paid within the stated
time limit, the present matter shall be submitted, upon request, to FIFA’s Disciplinary
Committee for consideration and a formal decision.
4.
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 A, country B / Club C, country D
5/5