Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 2 November 2005,
in the following composition:
Slim Aloulou (Tunisia), Chairman
Jean-Marie Philips (Belgium), member
Ivan Gazidis (USA), member
Mick Mc Guire (England), member
Philippe Piat (France), member
on the claim presented by the player
L., France,
represented by Me S., Qatar,
as Claimant
against the club
S., Qatar,
as Respondent,
regarding a contractual dispute arisen between the parties.
I.
Facts of the case
1.
On 13 May 2003, the player, L., and S. signed an employment contract for the
2003/2004 season, commencing on 1 July 2003. The club agreed to pay the player
the total amount of USD 1,200,000. The salary was paid.
2.
Art. 3 of the contract provided for the following bonuses:
“The Club will also pay additional bonus as followed:
- USD 100 000 in case the CLUB wins the Qatar Champion’s Title
- USD 75 000 in case the CLUB wins the EMIR Qatar’s Cup
- USD 50 000 in case the CLUB wins the PRINCE Qatar’s Cup
- USD 200 000 in case the CLUB wins the Asia’s Cup
In case of no qualification of the Asian Cup, the additional bonus will also be
paid as followed:
- USD 200 000 in case the CLUB wins the Qatar Champion’s Title
- USD 125 000 in case the CLUB wins the EMIR Qatar’s Cup
- USD 100 000 in case the CLUB wins the PRINCE Qatar’s Cup”
3.
On 20 February 2005, the player approached FIFA, claiming that no championship
bonus had been paid out although they had won the championship. The player
therefore demanded that the club be ordered to pay the championship bonus of
USD 200,000. Furthermore, the club should be ordered to pay his legal costs,
amounting to USD 20,000, and compensation for damages amounting to
USD 50,000.
4.
On 12 May 2005, the Qatar Football Association replied on behalf of the club that
it had in fact won the Qatari championship title at the end of the 2003/2004
season and thus automatically qualified for the “Asian Cup” (correctly: AFC
Champions League). The player was therefore entitled only to a bonus of USD
100,000, which he had already received. The club produced two letters dated 17
and 19 April 2005, substantiating the payment of USD 100,000. The claim was
therefore to be rejected entirely.
5.
In his statement dated 5 July 2005, the player pointed out that the bonus due in
May 2004 had not been paid until April 2005 – two months after the case had
been submitted to FIFA. The club was therefore over twelve months in arrears with
the bonus payment and had not considered it necessary to fulfil its obligations
despite being sent repeated reminders (copies of which were produced). As a
result of these breaches, the player had suffered humiliation that justified the
award of compensation for damages. In addition, legal costs had been incurred as
a result of appointing a lawyer and furthermore he had not had any benefit from
the amount and interest from the debt. He therefore reaffirmed his legal claim in
2
the initial written request and the joint order on S. and the Qatar Olympic
Committee to pay the amounts mentioned in the claim dated 20 February 2005.
6.
On 7 August 2005, the association replied on behalf of its club that the claim for
the amount of USD 200,000 – which, in its view, was bizarre – should be rejected,
as the championship bonus was only USD 100,000 and this sum had already been
paid. Consequently, no damage had been incurred and therefore no compensation
should be paid.
7.
In his final statement on 19 August 2005, the player reaffirmed his request for a
legal remedy.
II.
Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
Since the claim at hand had been lodged prior to 1 July 2005 and concerns an
employment contract concluded on 13 May 2003, the September 2001 edition of
the Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players (hereinafter the
Regulations) shall apply (cf. art. 26 par. 1 of the July 2005 Regulations).
2.
The Dispute Resolution Chamber of the FIFA Players’ Status Committee shall
review disputes coming under its jurisdiction pursuant to art. 42 of the
Regulations at the request of one of the parties to the dispute.
3.
According to art. 42 par. 1 lit. (b) (i) of the Regulations, the triggering elements of
the dispute (i.e. whether a contract was breached, with or without just cause, or
sporting just cause), will be decided by the Dispute Resolution Chamber.
4.
As a consequence, the Dispute Resolution Chamber is the competent body to
decide on the present litigation involving a club from Qatar and a player from
France and regarding alleged outstanding remuneration in connection with an
employment contract signed between the parties.
5.
Therefore, the members of the Dispute Resolution Chamber at first confirmed to
be competent to pass a decision in this matter. In addition, the Chamber
acknowledged the above-mentioned facts as well as the further documentation
contained in the file.
6.
Subsequently, and entering into the substance of the matter, the Chamber
considered that the player L. and S. signed a valid employment contract on 13 May
3
2003, according to which the player rendered his services until the end of the
season 2003/2004.
7.
The Chamber also noted that the player received all its salaries as provided in the
employment contract in the total amount of USD 1,200,000. Furthermore, the
Chamber observed that uncontestedly, the club paid the bonus for the Qatari
Championship in April 2005.
8.
Therefore, the Chamber pointed out that the player received all the contractual
stipulated amounts, such as the salaries and the bonus according to art. 3 par. 1 of
the employment contract.
9.
However, in its claim dated 20 February 2005 the player claimed misleadingly an
amount of USD 200,000 for the bonus for the Qatari Championship together with
legal costs, amounting to USD 20,000, and compensation for damages amounting
to USD 50,000. As soon as the correct amount for the bonus for the Qatari
Championship of USD 100,000 has been paid in April 2005, the player modified his
claim
and
claimed
continuously
the
same
aforementioned
amounts
as
compensation for damages. Therefore, the Chamber took note of the fact that the
player finally claimed an amount of USD 250,000 as compensation for damages
and USD 20,000 as legal costs.
10.
In this respect, the Chamber pointed out that even if the bonus for the Qatari
Championship has been paid with delay, the player is not entitled to claim such an
excessive amount from the club. Therefore, the Chamber referred to the principle
that excessive claims have to be considered as inexistent. The Chamber emphasised
that the player had been regularly paid his salaries and the bonus for the Qatari
Championship. As a result, it was decided that no compensation is due.
11.
Consequently, having thus analysed the various aspects of the player’s claim, as
well as the club’s defence statement, the Dispute Resolution Chamber concluded
its deliberations by announcing that the player’s claims have to be rejected.
4
III.
Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the player L. is rejected.
2.
According to art. 60 par. 1 of the FIFA Statutes this decision may be appealed
before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The statement of appeal must be
sent to the CAS directly within 10 days of receiving notification of this decision and
has to contain all elements in accordance with point 2 of the directives issued by
the CAS, copy of which we enclose hereto. Within another 10 days following the
expiry of the time limit for the filing of the statement of appeal, the appellant
shall file with the CAS a brief stating the facts and legal arguments giving rise to
the appeal (cf. point 4 of the directives).
The full address and contact numbers of the CAS are the following:
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 Dispute Resolution Chamber:
Urs Linsi
General Secretary
Encl.
CAS directives
5