Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 28 September 2007,
in the following composition:
Slim Aloulou (Tunisia), Chairman
Philippe Piat (France), member
Carlos Soto (Chile), member
Philippe Diallo (France), member
Zola Malvern Percival Majavu (South Africa), member
on the claim presented by the player,
X
as “Claimant”
against the club,
Y
as “Respondent”
regarding an employment-related contractual dispute between the player and the
club.
I.
Facts of the case
1.
On 1 December 2003, the player, X, and the club, Y, signed an employment
contract valid until 1 December 2004.
2.
In accordance with this contract, the player is entitled to receive, inter alia, the
following emoluments:
- “Contract amount”: … 100,000,000
- Monthly salary: … 17,000,000
- Food per month: … 1,500,000
- Transportation per month: … 1,500,000
- International transportation (1x): … 50,000,000
- Accommodation: no amount specified
3.
In August 2005, the player turned to FIFA claiming that the club still owed him
the total amount of … 90,000,000 (USD 9,944 cf. player) as per the following
breakdown:
- 2 months’ salary: … 34,000,000
- Food expenses (2 months): … 3,000,000
- Local transportation (2 months): … 3,000,000
- International transportation: … 50,000,000
4.
In reply to the player’s claim, the Football Association of Y informed FIFA, after
alleged attempts to find an amicable agreement, that its club could only pay …
37,000,000 and that the international transportation would no longer be the
club’s responsibility in accordance with an alleged mutual agreement.
5.
The player, for his part, asserts that no mutual agreement was reached and
that he has received no monies from the club. He insists that the club be
ordered to pay the amount of … 90,000,000.
6.
The present matter has remained inactive during one year due to the
claimant’s omission to provide his updated contact numbers.
7.
In spite of FIFA’s reminder to present its position in the matter, no
communication was ever received from Y.
2
II.
Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
First of all, the Chamber analyzed 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 in August
2005, as a consequence the Chamber concluded that the revised Rules
Governing Procedures (edition 2005, hereinafter: the Rules) on matters
pending before the decision making bodies of FIFA are applicable to 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 combination 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 an … club and a … player regarding
a contractual dispute 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 facts that the relevant
contract at the basis of the present dispute was signed on 1 December 2003
and that the claim was lodged at FIFA in August 2005. In view of the
aforementioned, the Chamber concluded that the current FIFA Regulations for
the Status and Transfers of Players (edition 2005, hereinafter: the Regulations)
are applicable to the case at hand as to the substance.
5.
Once its competence and the applicable Regulations were thus established, the
Dispute Resolution Chamber went on to deal with the substance of the case.
The members of the Chamber carefully studied the facts outlined above, which
show that the player, X, and the club, Y, signed a contract valid during the
2004 season in accordance with which the player was entitled to receive
various kinds of emoluments, which have been clearly specified in the
employment contract.
3
6.
In August 2005, the player turned to FIFA maintaining that the club had failed
to respect its contractual obligations, in that Y still owed him the total amount
of … 90,000,000 due to him on the basis of the relevant employment contract.
7.
The Chamber took into account that the amount of … 90,000,000 was duly
itemised by the player and that each item was indeed included as an
entitlement of the player in the pertinent employment contract.
8.
The Chamber took note of the fact that the Football Association of Y informed
FIFA that its club could only pay … 37,000,000 and that the international
transportation would no longer be the club’s responsibility in accordance with
an alleged mutual agreement between the club and the player. It was noted,
however, that no documentary evidence demonstrating any such mutual
agreement was produced by Y or the Football Association of Y and that the
player denies having entered into an amicable agreement with the club.
9.
The members of the Chamber took special note of the fact that the club has
never provided its response to the claim lodged by the player, in spite of
having been invited by FIFA to do so. The Chamber deemed that, in this way,
the club renounced its right of defense and accepted the allegations of the
Claimant. Furthermore, the Chamber confirmed that it shall thus take a
decision on the basis of the documents on file (cf. art. 9 par. 3 of the Rules).
10.
On account of all of the above, the Chamber accepted the player’s claim and
decided that Y is liable to pay to X the outstanding amount of … 90,000,000.
*****
4
III. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, X, is accepted.
2.
The Respondent, Y, has to pay the amount of … 90,000,000 to the Claimant
within 30 days as from the date of notification of this decision.
3.
In the event that the amount of … 90,000,000 is not paid within the stated
deadline, interest at the rate of 5% per year will apply as of expiry of the
aforementioned deadline.
4.
If the sum of … 90,000,000 is not paid within the aforementioned deadline, the
present matter shall be submitted to the FIFA Disciplinary Committee.
5.
The Claimant is directed to inform the Respondent immediately of the bank
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:
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:
_________________
Markus Kattner
Deputy General Secretary
Enclosed: CAS directives
5