Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 22 June 2007,
in the following composition:
Slim Aloulou (Tunisia), President (did not take part to the deliberations)
Essa M. Saleh Al-Housani (Uniated Arab Emirates), member
Philippe Diallo (France), member
Joaquim Evangelista (Portugal), member
Philippe Piat (France), member
on the claim presented by the player
X, xxx
represented by Mr xxxxx, attorney at law,
as Claimant
against the club
Y, xxxx,
as Respondent
on the basis of an employment contract
concluded between the parties
I.
Facts of the case
1.
The player X, the Claimant, and the club Y, the Respondent,
employment contract on 8 February 2006 valid until 31 June 2008.
2.
According to the said contract the Claimant is entitled to receive for the period as
from 8 February until 31 May 2006 the total amount of EUR 110,000 (EUR 40,000
on 10 February 2006, four times EUR 7,500 and EUR 40,000 divided by 17 matches,
i.e. EUR 2,350).
3.
For the season 2006/7 the amount of EUR 230,000 (EUR 90,000 on 15 August, ten
times EUR 7,000 and EUR 70,000 will be paid as EUR 2,060 per match)
4.
For the season 2007/8 the amount of EUR 250,000 (EUR 100,000 on 15 August, EUR
ten times EUR 8,000 and EUR 70,000 will be paid as EUR 2,060 per match).
5.
According to the contract the Respondent will allocate a furnished house and a
car. The rent will be paid by the Respondent but other expenses will be paid by
the Claimant.
6.
On 5 October 2006, the Claimant contacted FIFA and explained that on 15 July
2006, after being in Germany for the World Cup representing his national team,
he contacted the Respondent in order to be informed on which date he is
expected to start trainings. However, on 7 August 2006, the Respondent sent him
a letter, by means of which the club informed him that as he could not attend the
summer practice, he was free to find a new team.
7.
In view of the above, the Claimant is of the opinion that the Respondent
unilaterally terminated the employment contract and he is therefore asking for
the total amount of EUR 573,885 as compensation.
8.
In particular, the Claimant claims the amount of EUR 45,885 for the period as from
8 February until 31 May 2006, the amount of EUR 230,000 for the season 2006/7,
the amount of EUR 250,000 for the season 2007/8 and accommodation and car
costs for 24 months in the amount of EUR 48,000.
9.
FIFA contacted the Respondent through the xxxx Football Association on 5
October, 17 October and on 9 November 2006 but never received any answer at
all.
10.
Upon FIFA’s request the Claimant explained on 19 March 2007, that he has not
been able to find a new club and that he has got injured during a trial in Russia
and therefore his chances to find a new club have deteriorated.
signed an
2
II.
Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
First of all, the Chamber analysed whether it was competent to deal with the
matter at stake. In this respect, it referred to art. 18 par. 2 and 3 of the Rules
Governing the Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute
Resolution Chamber. The present matter was submitted to FIFA on 5 October
2006, as a consequence the Chamber concluded that the revised Rules Governing
Procedures (edition 2005) on matters pending before the decision making bodies
of FIFA are applicable on the matter at hand.
2.
With regard to the competence of the Chamber, art. 3 par. 1 of the abovementioned Rules states that the Dispute Resolution Chamber shall examine its
jurisdiction in the light of articles 22 to 24 of the current version of the
Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2005). In accordance
with art. 24 par. 1 in connection with art. 22 (b) of the aforementioned
Regulations, the Dispute Resolution Chamber shall adjudicate on employmentrelated disputes between a club and a player that have an international
dimension.
3.
As a consequence, the Dispute Resolution Chamber is the competent body to
decide on the present litigation involving a xxxx player and a xxxx club regarding a
claim in connection with an employment contract.
4.
Subsequently, the members of the Chamber analyzed which edition of the
Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players should be applicable as to the
substance of the matter. In this respect, the Chamber referred, on the one hand,
to art. 26 par. 1 and 2 of the Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players
(edition 2005) and, on the other hand, to the fact that the relevant contract at the
basis of the present dispute was signed on 8 February 2006 and the claim was
lodged at FIFA on 5 October 2006. In view of the aforementioned, the Chamber
concluded that the current FIFA Regulations for the Status and the Transfer of
Players (edition 2005, hereafter: the Regulations) are applicable to the case at
hand as to the substance.
5.
In continuation, and entering into the substance of the matter, the members of
the Chamber started by acknowledging that on 8 February 2006 the Claimant and
the Respondent signed an employment contract valid until 31 June 2008. By virtue
of the said contract the Claimant is entitled to receive for the period as from 8
February until 31 May 2006 the total amount of EUR 110,000 (EUR 40,000 on 10
February 2006, four times EUR 7,500 and EUR 40,000 divided by 17 matches, i.e.
EUR 2,350). For the season 2006/7 the amount of EUR 230,000 and for the season
2007/8 the amount of EUR 250,000. Equally, the Respondent will allocate a
furnished house and a car. The rent will be paid by the Respondent but other
expenses will be paid by the Claimant.
3
6.
In this respect, the Chamber duly noted that, the Claimant explained that after
being in Germany for the World Cup representing his national team, he contacted
the Respondent in order to be informed on which date he is expected to start
trainings. However, on 7 August 2006, the Respondent sent him a letter, by means
of which the club informed him that as he could not attend the summer practice,
he was free to find a new team. In this context, the Chamber considered that the
Claimant is of the opinion that the Respondent unilaterally terminated the
contract and he is therefore asking for the total amount of EUR 573,885 as
compensation.
7.
Turning its attention to the Respondent, the Chamber reproached the behaviour
of the Respondent, who never took position in the dispute, despite having been
asked to do so by the FIFA on several occasions. In this way the Respondent
renounced to its right to defence and accepted the allegations of the Claimant.
8.
Subsequently, the Chamber started its deliberations by emphasising that the
Claimant claims the outstanding amount of EUR 45,885 for the period as from 8
February until 31 May. In this context, the Chamber underlined that, as a general
rule, a club is liable to cancel all outstanding amounts contractually agreed upon
by the parties for the period of time during which a player had rendered his
services to the club.
9.
In view of the above general principle as well as the fact that the Respondent
never took position in the present dispute, i.e. did not contest the claim of the
Claimant, the Chamber concluded that the Respondent has to pay the allegedly
outstanding amount of EUR 45,885 for the period as from 8 February until 31 May
to the Claimant.
10.
In continuation, the Chamber turned its attention to the Claimant’s position with
regard that the Respondent unilaterally terminated the relevant employment
contract without just cause in August 2007.
11.
In this respect, the Chamber took due note of the contents of the relevant
correspondence dated 7 August 2006, by means of which the Respondent
informed the Claimant that due to his absence during the summer trainings he
was no longer needed as a player of the Respondent’s squad and he was therefore
free to continue his career with any other club.
12.
In light of the above, the Chamber deemed it important to underline that, as a
general principle, clubs are obliged to release their registered players for
representative teams during the World Cup (cf. art. 1 of annex 1 of the
Regulations). In this context, the Chamber pointed out that the Claimant had been
in Germany for the World Cup 2006 fulfilling his obligations by representing his
national team.
13.
Consequently, the Chamber stated that based on all documentation at its disposal
it has to be concluded that the Respondent terminated the contract prematurely
4
in August 2006 without justification. As a result, the members of the Chamber
concluded that the Respondent breached the employment contract signed with
the Claimant without just cause.
14.
In continuation, the Chamber turned its attention to the consequences in
connection with the breach of the employment contract and concluded that in
accordance with art. 17 par. 1 of the Regulations the Respondent is liable to pay
compensation to the Claimant for the breach of contract.
15.
In this context, the Chamber considered that the Claimant requests the entire
remaining value of the relevant employment contract, including accommodation
and car costs, corresponding to EUR 528,000 as compensation for the breach of
contract.
16.
The Chamber referred to art. 17 par. 1 of the Regulations, in particular to the nonexhaustive enumeration of objective criteria, and took into account the
contractually agreed remuneration for the for the season 2006/7 in the amount of
EUR 230,000, for the season 2007/8 in the amount of EUR 250,000 as well as the
time remaining on the said employment contract as from the Respondent’s breach
of contract, i.e. two seasons. Equally, the Chamber considered that the Claimant
has not been able to find a new club and that he apparently has got injured
during a trial in Russia. Finally, the Chamber also considered that the Respondent
never took part in the present procedure, although, having been invited to so.
17.
In view of all of the above, the members of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
unanimously concluded that the Respondent must pay a compensation on the
amount of EUR 350,000 for the unjustified breach of contract.
18.
As a result, the Chamber decided that the Respondent must pay to the Claimant
the total amount of EUR 395,885 (EUR 45,885 for outstanding remuneration and
EUR 350,000 for the unjustified breach of contract).
III.
Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim lodged by the Claimant is partially accepted.
2.
The Respondent must pay to the Claimant the total amount of EUR 395,885
within 30 days as from the date of notification of this decision.
3.
Any further claim lodged by the Claimant is rejected.
4.
If the aforementioned sum is not paid within the aforementioned deadline an
interest rate of 5% per year will apply as of expiring of the fixed time limit and
the present matter shall be submitted to FIFA’s Disciplinary Committee, so that the
necessary disciplinary sanctions may be imposed.
5
5.
The Claimant is directed to inform the Respondent directly and immediately of the
account number to which the remittance is to be made and to notify the Dispute
Resolution Chamber of every payment received.
6.
According to art. 61 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 Dispute Resolution Chamber:
Jérôme Valcke
General Secretary
Encl.
CAS directives
6