Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 22 August 2024
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the player A
COMPOSITION:
Frans DE WEGER (The Netherlands), Chairperson
Oleg ZADUBROVSKIY (Russia), Member
Khadija TIMERA (Senegal), Member
CLAIMANT/COUNTER-RESPONDENT:
Player A, Country A
Represented by
RESPONDENT/COUNTER-CLAIMANT:
Club B, Country B
Represented by
INTERVENING PARTY:
Club C, Country B
Represented by
REF. FPSD-xxxxx
I. Facts of the case
1.
On 30 July 2021, the Country A player, Player A (hereinafter: the Claimant/CounterRespondent or Player), and the Country B club, Club B (hereinafter: the Respondent/CounterClaimant or Club) signed an employment contract (hereinafter: the Contract) valid as from
30 July 2021 until 31 May 2024.
2.
In accordance with the Contract, the Respondent undertook to pay to the
Claimant/Counter-Respondent inter alia the following amounts:
“Advance Payment;
Club shall pay net 200,000 Euro until 30.09.2023 as an advance payment.
Monthly Salary;
- The yearly salary of the Player for season 2023/2024 shall be net €800.000
(eighthundredthousandeuro) totally. The amount (800.000 Euro) shall be divided into 10 equal
salaries so Player’s monthly salary shall be net €80,000 (eightythousandEuro) each month
(September 2023 – June 2024) to be paid until the last business day of the respective month.
Bonus Payments:
- In case of Player achieves to be in starting squad (first 11) on 28 official league matches in
2023/2024 football season Club shall pay net 50,000 Euro bonus payment until 30 June
2024.
- In case of Player achieves to be in starting squad (first 11) on 33 official league matches in
2023/2024 football season Club shall pay net 50,000 Euro bonus payment until 30 June
2024.
- Club shall pay totally net 50.000 Euro to the Player if Player achieves to score 10 goals and/or
assists (goal + assist in total) in official league matches of 2023/2024 football season.
- Club shall pay additional net 50.000 Euro to the Player if Player achieves to score 15 goals
and/or assists (goal + assist in total) in official league matches of 2023/2024 football season.
- Club shall pay only net 25.000 Euro in case of Club achieves to be in 4 or 5th place at the end
of the 2023/2024 Country B league rank table to be paid until 30 June 2024 at the latest.
- Club shall pay only net 50.000 Euro in case of Club achieves to be in 3rd place at the end of
the 2023/2024 Country B league rank table to be paid until 30 June 2024 at the latest.
- Club shall pay only net 75.000 Euro in case of Club achieves to be in 2nd place at the end of
the 2023/2024 Country B league rank table to be paid until 30 June 2024 at the latest.
- Club shall pay only net 100.000 Euro in case of Club achieves to be in 1st place at the end of
the 2023/2024 Country B league rank table to be paid until 30 June 2024 at the latest. These
clauses are not cumulative if Club shall be in 1st only 100.000 Euro shall be paid to the Player
to be paid until 30 June 2024 at the latest.
- Club shall pay net 50.000 Euro in case of Club shall be champion on Country B Cup to be
paid until 30 June 2024 at the latest.
pg. 2
REF. FPSD-xxxxx
[...]
Club shall totally NET 15.000 Euro to the Player for accommodation, car and other expenses for
each season. This payment shall be divided into 10 equal instalments. Club shall pay 1.500 Euro
each month (from September until June) on the 30. of every month at the latest.”
3.
By correspondence dated 14 November 2023, the Claimant/Counter-Respondent sent a
default notice to the Respondent/Counter-Claimant claiming payment in the amount of
EUR 388,000, broken down as follows: EUR 200,000 for “Advance payment dated 30.09.2023”;
two salary payments for September 2023 and October 2023, each in the amount of EUR
80,000; a “bonus payment in relation with the football season of 2022/2023” in the amount of
EUR 25,000; and “Accommodation, car and other expenses in relation with September 2023
and October 2023” for a total of EUR 3,000.
4.
The Claimant/Counter-Respondent provided the Respondent/Counter-Claimant 15 days to
remedy the default.
5.
On 27 December 2023, the Respondent/Counter-Claimant paid USD 60,000 to the
Claimant/Counter-Respondent.
6.
On 2 February 2024, the Claimant/Counter-Respondent terminated the Contract due to
outstanding remuneration.
7.
On the same day, 2 February 2024, the Respondent/Counter-Claimant paid EUR 30,000 to
the Claimant/Counter-Respondent.
8.
On 7 February the Claimant/Counter-Respondent concluded an employment contract
(hereinafter: the “New Contract”) with the Country B club, Club C (hereinafter: the
“Intervening Party”).
9.
Per the New Contract, the Intervening Party undertook, inter alia, to pay the
Claimant/Counter-Respondent the following remuneration:
“FOR 2023 – 2024 SEASON
In Total :
710.000-EUR (Seven hundred ten thousand Euros) in net.
Fix Payment : 210.000-EUR (Two hundred ten thousand Euros) in net within 7 business day
following the signature of this Employment Contract.
Salary
:
Club shall pay a total of 440.000-EUR (Four hundred forty thousand Euros) in
net as salary. The salary shall be 110.00-EUR (One hundred ten thousand Euros) in net and will
be paid between the dates 31st of March 2024 and 30th of June 2024 in monthly basis. The
payment shall be made at the end of each month, Minimum wage is included in the monthly
salary.
pg. 3
REF. FPSD-xxxxx
Living Expenses : 60.000-EUR (Sixty thousand Euros) in net shall be paid in two equal instalments
on 28.02.2024 and 31.05.2024 for the Player’s living expenses. [. . . ]”
II. Proceedings before FIFA
10. On 8 February 2024, the Claimant/Counter-Respondent filed the claim at hand before FIFA.
A brief summary of the position of the parties is detailed in continuation.
a. Position of the Claimant/Counter-Respondent
11. According to the Claimant/Counter-Respondent, the Respondent/Counter-Claimant failed
to pay the monthly salaries of EUR 80,000 and monthly accommodation payments of EUR
1,500 for the months of September 2023 through January 2024, each falling due under the
Contract at the end of their respective month.
12. The Claimant/Counter-Respondent further stated that the Respondent/Counter-Claimant
failed to pay a portion of the advance payment due on 30 September 2023. The
Claimant/Counter-Respondent alleged that the outstanding amount for the advance
payment was EUR 140,652.
13. The request for relief of the Claimant/Counter-Respondent, was as follows:
“[ . . . ] [T]o make a decision that the [Respondent/Counter-Claimant] has to pay the overdue and
unpaid amount of 548.152.00-Euro -Euro (Five Hundred Forty Eight Thousand One Hundred Fifty
Two Euros) NET with its 5% p.a. interest starting from the respective due dates which are
indicated in 3.2. above until the date of effective payment.”
b. Position of the Respondent/Counter-Claimant
14. According to the Respondent/Counter-Claimant, it paid to the Claimant/CounterRespondent USD 60,000, allegedly converting to EUR 54,459.29 on 27 December 2023, as
well as EUR 30,000 on 2 February 2024.
15. For the remaining amounts, the Respondent/Counter-Claimant did not dispute that they
were payable under the Contract but cited as its reasons for non-payment its economic
hardship caused by an earthquake in Country B and accompanying depreciation of the
value of the Country B’s currency.
16. The Respondent/Counter-Claimant further argued that the Claimant/Counter-Respondent
terminated the Contract without just cause. The Respondent/Counter-Claimant went on to
pg. 4
REF. FPSD-xxxxx
argue that the Claimant, by accepting the payments made following the default notice, and
allowing four months to pass before ultimately tendering his notice of termination, he was
not justified in terminating the Contract on 2 February 2024.
17. The Respondent/Counter-Claimant concluded that the Claimant/Counter-Respondent was
therefore liable to pay compensation to the Respondent/Counter-Claimant in the amount
of EUR 315,134 for breach of contract.
18. The requests for relief of the Respondent/Counter-Claimant, were the following:
For the Response:
1. “To determine that the Player did not terminate the Contract with just cause.
2. To dismiss the Statement of Claim in its entirety.
3. To fix a sum of Currency Country C 10,000 to be paid by the Player to the Club in order to
contribute to the payment of its legal fees and costs.
4. To condemn the Player to the payment of the whole administration costs and fees.”
For the Counterclaim:
1. “To accept this Counterclaim;
2. To determine that the Player terminated the Contract without just cause;
3. To condemn the Player to pay the Club compensation in the amount of EUR 315,134.00, plus
5% p.a. default interests from 6 February 2024 until full and entire payment, as per article
17.1 of the FIFA RSTP;
4. To sanction the Player with a restriction on playing in official matches from four to six
months, as per article 17.3 of the FIFA RSTP;
5. To fix a sum of 10,000 Currency Country C to be paid by the Player to the Club in order to
contribute to the payment of its legal fees and costs.
6. To condemn the Player to the payment of the whole administration costs and fees.”
c. Reply of the Claimant/Counter-Respondent to the Counterclaim
pg. 5
REF. FPSD-xxxxx
19. The Claimant/Counter-Respondent rejected the Counterclaim, arguing that the payments
made by the Club in the amount of EUR 84,348 had been taken into consideration in his
Statement of Claim.
20. The Claimant/Counter-Respondent further argued that the aforementioned payments
represented only a partial payment of the entire debt owed and therefore the
Claimant/Counter-Respondent had the right to terminate the Contract with just cause in
accordance with art. 14bis of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players
(hereinafter: the Regulations).
21. The Claimant/Counter-Respondent submitted that the termination letter on 2 February
2024 represented that the Claimant/Counter-Respondent no longer had an expectation of
payment by the Club despite prior notice, after a good faith effort to maintain the Contract
to receive the entitlements.
22. The Claimant/Counter-Respondent further noted that in the months following the default
notice, further salaries became due despite the partial payments made by the
Respondent/Counter-Claimant.
23. The Claimant/Counter-Respondent requested the following relief:
-
“To dismiss the Counterclaim of the Respondent/Counter Claimant,
-
To accept the claims of the Claimant/Counter Respondent subjected to the Statement of Claim
dated 08.02.2024,
-
To make a decision that the judicial costs and the attorneyship fees that the Claimant/Counter
Respondent is faced with shall be paid by the Respondent/Counter Claimant.”
d. Position of the Intervening Party
24. On 27 June 2024 and due to the possibility of being deemed jointly liable for the payment
of the compensation in accordance with art. 17, par. 4 of the Regulations, the Intervening
Party was called as a party to the proceedings and was invited by the FIFA general
secretariat to submit its position to the file (cf. art. 9 par. 4 of the Procedural Rules
Governing the Football Tribunal (hereinafter: the Procedural Rules)).
25. In its submission, the Intervening Party argued that it signed the New Contract six days
after the termination of the Contract, and echoed the Claimant/Counter-Respondent’s
position that he terminated the Contract for failure of the Respondent/Counter-Claimant
to pay outstanding remuneration and further, that the relationship between the
Claimant/Counter-Respondent
and
Respondent/Counter-Claimant
had
already
deteriorated as a result of the unpaid amounts.
pg. 6
REF. FPSD-xxxxx
26. The Intervening Party requested the following relief:
1- “To reject [the Respondent/Counter-Claimant]’s claim;
2- To declare that the Player terminated his
Respondent/Counter-Claimant] with just cause;
Employment
Contract
with
[the
If the Tribunal would decide that the Player’s termination was without just cause then, we hereby
request the Tribunal;
3- Not to hold responsible [the Intervening Party] jointly and severally liable,
4- Not to apply Art. 17 par.4 to [the Intervening Party] as the [Intervening Party] did not induce
the Player”
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
27. First of all, the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: the Chamber or DRC) analysed
whether it was competent to deal with the case at hand. In this respect, it took note that
the present matter was presented to FIFA on 8 February 2024 and submitted for decision
on 22 August 2024. Taking into account the wording of art. 34 of the March 2023 edition of
the Procedural Rules, the aforementioned edition of the Procedural Rules is applicable to
the matter at hand.
28. Furthermore, the Chamber referred to art. 2 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules and observed
that in accordance with art. 23 par. 1 in combination with art. 22 par. 1 lit. b) of the
Regulations (June 2024 edition), the Dispute Resolution Chamber is competent to deal with
the matter at stake, which concerns an employment-related dispute with an international
dimension between a Country A player and a Country B club.
29. Subsequently, the Chamber analysed which regulations should be applicable as to the
substance of the matter. In this respect, it confirmed that, in accordance with art. 26 par. 1
and 2 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (June 2024 edition), and
considering that the present claim was lodged on 8 February 2024, the February 2024
edition of said regulations (hereinafter: the Regulations) is applicable to the matter at hand
as to the substance.
b. Burden of proof
pg. 7
REF. FPSD-xxxxx
30. The Chamber recalled the basic principle of burden of proof, as stipulated in art. 13
par. 5 of the Procedural Rules, according to which a party claiming a right on the basis of
an alleged fact shall carry the respective burden of proof. Likewise, the Chamber stressed
the wording of art. 13 par. 4 of the Procedural Rules, pursuant to which it may consider
evidence not filed by the parties, including without limitation the evidence generated by or
within the Transfer Matching System (TMS).
c. Merits of the dispute
31. Having established the competence and the applicable regulations, the Chamber entered
into the merits of the dispute. In this respect, the Chamber started by acknowledging all
the above-mentioned facts as well as the arguments and the documentation on file.
However, the Chamber emphasised that in the following considerations it will refer only to
the facts, arguments and documentary evidence, which it considered pertinent for
assessing the matter at hand.
i. Main legal discussion and considerations
32. The Chamber noted that the matter at hand concerns a claim of a player against a club for
outstanding remuneration, including a counterclaim of the club.
33. The Chamber then moved to the substance of the matter and took note of the fact that the
parties strongly dispute whether the Player had just cause to terminate the Contract.
34. In this context, the Chamber acknowledged that it its task was to determine whether the
outstanding remuneration claimed by the Claimant/Counter-Respondent constituted said
just cause.
35. The Chamber took note of the Claimant/Counter-Respondent’s argument that the
Respondent/Counter-Claimant failed to remit a substantial part of the advance payment
for the 2023/2024 sporting season, as well as five monthly salaries including a monthly
accommodation allowance from September 2023 until January 2024.
36. The Chamber recalled that the Respondent/Counter-Claimant bore the burden of proving
that it indeed complied with the financial terms of the Contract.
37. Next, the Chamber observed that the Respondent/Counter-Claimant did not dispute that
it had owed outstanding remuneration to the Claimant/Counter-Respondent, but instead
argued that it was unable to pay due to financial difficulties and that it had already paid a
total of EUR 84,348: USD 60,000 on 27 December 2023 and EUR 30,000 on 2 February 2024.
38. The Chamber then highlighted that the Claimant/Counter-Respondent acknowledged
having received the EUR 84,348 in payments as noted by the Respondent/Counter-
pg. 8
REF. FPSD-xxxxx
Claimant but maintained that such payments represented only a fraction of the amounts
owed. Moreover, the Chamber noted that the Claimant/Counter-Respondent did not
present further allegations as to which of the claimed payments had been satisfied with
the amount received.
39. The Chamber recalled that the Claimant had claimed EUR 548,152 in its request for relief,
representing EUR 140,652 for the partially paid advance payment, and EUR 407,500 for the
five months’ unpaid salary and accommodation allowances.
40. The foregoing notwithstanding, the Chamber noted that the advance payment of EUR
200,000, less the amounts acknowledged as paid, EUR 84,348, in fact came out to EUR
115,652, rather than the EUR 140,652 claimed by the Claimant.
41. In continuation, the Chamber recalled that FIFA’s longstanding jurisprudence holds that
financial difficulties do not constitute a valid reason to postpone or stop contractual
payments.
42. The Chamber determined that the Respondent/Counter-Claimant failed to prove that it
fulfilled its financial obligations under the Contract, and therefore, it indeed owed
outstanding remuneration to the Claimant/Counter-Respondent.
43. The Chamber therefore concluded that the Claimant/Counter-Respondent should be
partially accepted.
44. Turning its attention to the Counterclaim, the Chamber took note that the
Claimant/Counter-Respondent had sent a default notice to the Respondent/CounterClaimant which include claims for the unpaid advance in the amount of EUR 200,000 as
well as salaries and allowances for the months of September 2023 and October 2023, each
monthly salary plus allowance payment in the amount of EUR 81,500.
45. The Chamber further noted that the Claimant provided the Respondent 15 days, as
required by art. 14bis of the Regulations, to cure said default following which – the
payments by the Respondent/Counter-Claimant notwithstanding – a significant portion of
the dept remained outstanding.
46. On account of the foregoing, the Chamber determined that the Respondent/CounterClaimant had repeatedly and for a significant period of time breached its contractual
obligations towards the Claimant/Counter-Respondent and that the Claimant/CounterRespondent therefore had just cause to terminate the employment contract on 2 February
2024.
47. Therefore, the Chamber concluded that the Counterclaim should be rejected.
pg. 9
REF. FPSD-xxxxx
48. Furthermore, the Chamber recalled that pursuant to art. 17 par. 2 and par. 4 of the
Regulations, a player’s new club shall be jointly and severally liable in cases where a player
is liable for compensation, and further that such player’s new club may receive sanctions if
it is found to have induced a player’s breach of contract.
49. Specifically, the Chamber recalled the language of the Regulations that a club signing a
professional who has been found to terminate his contract without just cause shall be
presumed to have induced such breach.
50. In the matter at hand, however, the Chamber found that no termination without just cause
had been committed; to the contrary, the Chamber determined that the Claimant/CounterRespondent had just cause to terminate the Contract due to outstanding remuneration
and determined that the Counterclaim should be denied.
51. Therefore, the Chamber determined that there was no basis for further analysing any
liability on part of the Intervening Party.
ii. Consequences
52. Having stated the above, the members of the Chamber turned their attention to the
question of the consequences of such unjustified breach of contract committed by the
Respondent.
53. The Chamber observed that the outstanding remuneration at the time of termination,
coupled with the specific requests for relief of the player, are equivalent to a partially
outstanding advance payment of EUR 115,652, plus five salaries at EUR 80,000 per month
and five accommodation allowance payments at EUR 1,500 per month under the contract,
amounting to a total of EUR 407,500.
54. As a consequence, and in accordance with the general legal principle of pacta sunt servanda,
the Chamber decided that the Respondent is liable to pay to the Claimant the abovedescribed amounts which were outstanding under the contract at the moment of the
termination, i.e., EUR 523,152.
55. In addition, taking into consideration the Claimant’s request as well as the constant practice
of the Chamber in this regard, the latter decided to award the Claimant interest at the rate
of 5% p.a. on the outstanding amounts as from their respective due dates until the date of
effective payment.
iii. Compliance with monetary decisions
pg. 10
REF. FPSD-xxxxx
56. Finally, taking into account the applicable Regulations, the Chamber referred to art. 24 par.
1 and 2 of the Regulations, which stipulate that, with its decision, the pertinent FIFA
deciding body shall also rule on the consequences deriving from the failure of the
concerned party to pay the relevant amounts of outstanding remuneration and/or
compensation in due time.
57. In this regard, the DRC highlighted that, against clubs, the consequence of the failure to
pay the relevant amounts in due time shall consist of a ban from registering any new
players, either nationally or internationally, up until the due amounts are paid. The overall
maximum duration of the registration ban shall be of up to three entire and consecutive
registration periods.
58. Therefore, bearing in mind the above, the DRC decided that the Respondent must pay the
full amount due (including all applicable interest) to the Claimant within 45 days of
notification of the decision, failing which, at the request of the Claimant, a ban from
registering any new players, either nationally or internationally, for the maximum duration
of three entire and consecutive registration periods shall become immediately effective on
the Respondent in accordance with art. 24 par. 2, 4, and 7 of the Regulations.
59. The Respondent shall make full payment (including all applicable interest) to the bank
account provided by the Claimant in the Bank Account Registration Form, which is attached
to the present decision.
60. The DRC recalled that the above-mentioned ban will be lifted immediately and prior to its
complete serving upon payment of the due amounts, in accordance with art. 24 par. 8 of
the Regulations.
d. Costs
61. The Chamber referred to art. 25 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules, according to which
“Procedures are free of charge where at least one of the parties is a player, coach, football agent,
or match agent”. Accordingly, the Chamber decided that no procedural costs were to be
imposed on the parties.
62. Likewise, and for the sake of completeness, the Chamber recalled the contents of art. 25
par. 8 of the Procedural Rules, and decided that no procedural compensation shall be
awarded in these proceedings.
63. Lastly, the DRC concluded its deliberations by rejecting any other requests for relief made
by any of the parties.
pg. 11
REF. FPSD-xxxxx
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant/Counter-Respondent, Player A, is partially accepted.
2.
The Respondent/Counter-Claimant, Club B, must pay to the Claimant/Counter-Respondent
the following amount(s):
- EUR 115,652 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 October 2023
until the date of effective payment;
- EUR 81,500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 October 2023
until the date of effective payment;
- EUR 81,500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 November
2023 until the date of effective payment;
- EUR 81,500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 December
2023 until the date of effective payment;
- EUR 81,500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 January 2024
until the date of effective payment;
- EUR 81,500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 February 2024
until the date of effective payment.
3.
Any further claims of the Claimant/Counter-Respondent are rejected.
4.
The counterclaim of the Respondent/Counter-Claimant is rejected.
5.
Full payment (including all applicable interest) shall be made to the bank account indicated
in the enclosed Bank Account Registration Form.
6.
Pursuant to art. 24 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players, if full payment
(including all applicable interest) is not made within 45 days of notification of this decision,
the following consequences shall apply:
1. The Respondent shall be banned from registering any new players, either nationally or
internationally, up until the due amount is paid. The maximum duration of the ban shall
be of up to three entire and consecutive registration periods.
2. The present matter shall be submitted, upon request, to the FIFA Disciplinary Committee
in the event that full payment (including all applicable interest) is still not made by the
end of the three entire and consecutive registration periods.
pg. 12
REF. FPSD-xxxxx
7.
The consequences shall only be enforced at the request of the Claimant/CounterRespondent in accordance with art. 24 par. 7 and 8 and art. 25 of the Regulations on the
Status and Transfer of Players.
For the Football Tribunal:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
pg. 13
REF. FPSD-xxxxx
NOTE RELATED TO THE APPEAL PROCEDURE:
According to article 57 par. 1 of the FIFA Statutes, this decision may be appealed against before
the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) within 21 days of receipt of the notification of this
decision.
NOTE RELATED TO THE PUBLICATION:
FIFA may publish this decision. For reasons of confidentiality, FIFA may decide, at the request
of a party within five days of the notification of the motivated decision, to publish an
anonymised or a redacted version (cf. article 17 of the Procedural Rules Governing the Football
Tribunal).
CONTACT INFORMATION
Fédération Internationale de Football Association
FIFA-Strasse 20 P.O. Box 8044 Zurich Switzerland
www.fifa.com | legal.fifa.com | [email protected] | T: +41 (0)43 222 7777
pg. 14