Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) judge
passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 12 May 2015,
by Theo van Seggelen (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 10 July 2013, the Player A from country B (hereinafter: player or Claimant) and the
Club C from country D (hereinafter: club or Respondent) concluded an employment
contract (hereinafter: contract), valid from 10 July 2013 until 31 May 2014.
2.
According to the contract, the player was entitled to receive inter alia a remuneration
of USD 125,000, payable as follows: USD 35,000 on 10 July 2013, 10 monthly payments
of USD 4,000 in the period between 31 August 2013 and 31 May 2014, and a
maximum fee of USD 1,389 for each of the 36 matches to be played by the club.
3.
Further, according to the contract, the player is entitled to receive 100% of the match
fee of USD 1,389 ‘if he is within the first 11 in game team’, 50% of the match fee of
USD 1,389 ‘if he is within the first 18 in game team and participate in the game
afterwards’, 25% of the match fee of USD 1,389 ‘if he is within the first 18 in game
team and doesn’t participate in the game afterwards’ and 0% of the match fee of
USD 1,389, ‘if he is not within the game team’.
4.
On 7 November 2014, the player lodged a claim against the club in front of FIFA,
asking that the club be ordered to pay the total amount of USD 57,462, plus 5%
interest.
5.
The player asserts that he was entitled to receive the total amount of USD 100,002 as
from 10 July 2013 until 31 May 2014, i.e. USD 35,000 to be paid on 10 July 2013, USD
40,000 in monthly instalments and USD 25,002 in match bonuses.
6.
The player states that in 16 official matches he was in the first 11 of the team, that in
1 match he was in the first 18 of the team and participated in the match and finally
and that in 6 matches he was in the first 18 of the team and did not participate in the
match. Therefore, the player claims to be owed the total amount of USD 25,002
related to the matches played by the club, specified as follows:
a. 16 x USD 1,389 (100%) = USD 22,224;
b. 1 x USD 694.50 (50%) = USD 694.50;
c. 6 x USD 347.25 (25%) = USD 2,083.50.
7.
The player states that the club only paid him the total amount of USD 42,540.
Therefore, he claims to be owed by the club the total amount of USD 57,462.
8.
The club only presented its position to the claim of the player after the closure of the
investigation phase of the matter, arguing that the player was only entitled to the
amount of USD 100,000 and that it had already paid the amount of USD 44,009,
concluding that it only owes the amount of USD 55,991 to the player.
II.
Considerations of the DRC judge
Player A, country B / Club C, country D
Page 2 of 5
1.
First, the Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) judge analysed whether he was
competent to deal with the case at hand. In this respect, the DRC judge took note
that the present matter was submitted to FIFA on 7 November 2014. Consequently,
the DRC judge concluded that the 2014 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 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
2015) 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 par. 2 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (2015
edition), and considering that the present claim was lodged on 7 November 2014, the
2014 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 this respect,
the DRC judge started by acknowledging all the above-mentioned facts as well as the
arguments and the documentation submitted by the parties. However, the DRC judge
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.
First of all, the DRC judge acknowledged that the Claimant and the Respondent had
concluded an employment contract valid as from 10 July 2013 until 31 May 2014.
6.
The DRC judge further observed that the Claimant is seeking payment from the
Respondent of the amount of USD 57,462, indicating that he was entitled to a total
amount of USD 100,002, but that the Respondent only paid him the amount of USD
42,540.
7.
Subsequently, the DRC judge observed that the Respondent, for its part, in spite of
having been invited to do so, failed to present its response to the claim of the
Claimant within the relevant time-limit. In fact, the reply of the Respondent was only
received after the investigation-phase of the matter had already been concluded. As a
result, the DRC judge decided not to take into account the reply of the Respondent
and established that, in accordance with art. 9 par. 3 of the Procedural Rules, he shall
take a decision upon the basis of those documents on file that were provided prior to
Player A, country B / Club C, country D
Page 3 of 5
the closure of the investigation-phase, in casu, upon the statements and documents
presented by the Claimant.
8.
In continuation, the DRC judge acknowledged that the Claimant stated that for the
whole term of the contract, he was entitled the receive the total amount of USD
100,002, as follows: the amount of USD 35,000 on 10 July 2013, the amount of USD
40,000 as monthly salaries during the contractual period as well as the amount of USD
25,002 as match bonuses.
9.
In this respect, the DRC judge took into consideration that according to the Claimant,
the Respondent had failed to pay his remuneration in the total amount of USD
57,462, since the club only paid him the amount of USD 42,540 out of the total
amount of USD 100,002. Consequently, the Claimant requested to be awarded with
the payment of the total amount of USD 57,462.
10.
Further, the DRC judge acknowledged that the Claimant presented documentary
evidence that he is entitled to the match bonuses in the amount of USD 25,002 and
that, in accordance with the employment contract provided by the Claimant, the
Respondent further was obliged to pay to the Claimant the amounts of USD 35,000
and USD 40,000.
11.
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.
12.
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 57,462.
13.
In continuation and with regard to the Claimant's request for interest, the DRC judge
decided that the Claimant is entitled to receive interest at the rate of 5% p.a. on the
amount of USD 57,462 as from 7 November 2014 until the date of effective payment.
14.
The DRC judge further decided that the Claimant's claim for legal costs is rejected, in
accordance with art. 18 par. 4 of the Procedural Rules and the respective
longstanding jurisprudence of the Dispute Resolution Chamber.
15.
The DRC judge concluded his deliberations in the present matter by rejecting any
further claim of the Claimant.
*****
III.
Decision of the DRC judge
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Player A, is partially accepted.
Player A, country B / Club C, country D
Page 4 of 5
2.
The Respondent, Club C, has to pay to the Claimant, within 30 days as from the date
of notification of this decision, outstanding remuneration in the amount of USD
57,462 plus 5% interest p.a. as of 7 November 2014 until the date of effective
payment.
3.
In the event that the afore-mentioned sum plus interest is not paid within the stated
time limit, the present matter shall be submitted, upon request, to the FIFA
Disciplinary Committee for consideration and a formal decision.
4.
Any further claim lodged by the Claimant is rejected.
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 article 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
Page 5 of 5