Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF. FPSD-8674
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 30 March 2023
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning
the player
BY:
Frans DE WEGER (The Netherlands), Chairperson
Johan VAN GAALEN (South Africa), member
Dana AL-NOAIMI (Qatar), member
CLAIMANT:
Khaled Al Nabrasi, Palestine
Represented by Emad Hanayneh
RESPONDENT:
Ismaily SC, Egypt
pg. 2
REF. FPSD-8674
I. Facts of the case
1.
On 25 January 2022, the Palestinian player Khaled Al Nabrasi (hereinafter: the player or the
Claimant) and the Egyptian club, Ismaily SC (hereinafter: the club or the Respondent)
concluded an employment contract (hereinafter: the contract) valid for 4 and a half seasons,
i.e., until the end of season 2025/2026.
2.
Clause 2 of the contract reads inter alia as follows (quoted verbatim):
“The First season 2021/2022 return is $40,000, amount of Forty thousand US dollars,
distributed as follows:
The 1st installment: $15,000 only, an amount of fifteen thousand US dollars, to be paid on
25/01/2022.
The 2nd installment: $5,000 only, an amount of five thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/03/2022
The 3rd installment: $5,000 only, an amount of five thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/04/2022
The 4th installment: $5,000 only, an amount of five thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/06/2022
The 5th installment: $10,000 only, an amount of ten thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/08/2022
The Second season 2022/2023 return is $80,000, amount of eighty thousand US dollars,
distributed as follows:
The 1st installment: $20,000 only, an amount of twenty thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/09/2022
The 2nd installment: $4,000 only, an amount of four thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/10/2022
The 3rd installment: $4,000 only, an amount of four thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/11/2022
The 4th installment: $4,000 only, an amount of four thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/12/2022
The 5th installment: $4,000 only, an amount of four thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/01/2023
pg. 3
REF. FPSD-8674
The 6th installment: $4,000 only, an amount of four thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/02/2023
The 7th installment: $4,000 only, an amount of four thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/03/2023
The 8th installment: $4,000 only, an amount of four thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/04/2023
The 9th installment: $4,000 only, an amount of four thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/05/2023
The 10th installment: $4,000 only, an amount of four thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/06/2023
The 11th installment: $4,000 only, an amount of four thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/07/2023
The 12th installment: $20,000 only, an amount of twenty thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/08/2023
The Third season 2023/2024 return is $100,000, an amount of one hundred thousand
US dollars distributed as follows:
The 1st installment: $25,000 only, an amount of twenty-five thousand US dollars, to be paid
on 09/01/2023
The 2nd installment: $5,000 only, an amount of Five thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/10/2023
The 3rd installment: $5,000 only, an amount of Five thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/11/2023
The 4th installment: $5,000 only, an amount of Five thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/12/2023
The 5th installment: $5,000 only, an amount of Five thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/01/2024
The 6th installment: $5,000 only, an amount of Five thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/02/2024
pg. 4
REF. FPSD-8674
The 7th installment: $5,000 only, an amount of Five thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/03/2024
The 8th installment: $5,000 only, an amount of Five thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/04/2024
The 9th installment: $5,000 only, an amount of Five thousand US dollars, to be paid on
05/01/2024
The 10th installment: $5,000 only, an amount of Five thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/06/2024
The 11th installment: $5,000 only, an amount of Five thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/07/2024
The 12th installment: $25,000 only, an amount of twenty-five thousand US dollars, to be paid
on 01/08/2024
The Fourth season 2024/2025 return is $140,000, an amount of One hundred and forty
thousand US dollars, distributed as follows:
The 1st installment: $35,000 only, an amount of thirty-five thousand US dollars, to be paid
on 09/01/2024
The 2nd installment: $7,000 only, an amount of Seven thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/10/2024
The 3rd installment: $7,000 only, an amount of Seven thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/11/2024
The 4th installment: $7,000 only, an amount of Seven thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/12/2024
The 5th installment: $7,000 only, an amount of Seven thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/01/2025
The 6th installment: $7,000 only, an amount of Seven thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/02/2025
The 7th installment: $7,000 only, an amount of Seven thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/03/2025
The 8th installment: $7,000 only, an amount of Seven thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/04/2025
pg. 5
REF. FPSD-8674
The 9th installment: $7,000 only, an amount of Seven thousand US dollars, to be paid on
05/01/2025
The 10th installment: $7,000 only, an amount of Seven thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/06/2025
The 11th installment: $7,000 only, an amount of Seven thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/07/2025
The 12th installment: $35,000 only, an amount of thirty-five thousand US dollars, to be
paid on 01/08/2025
The Fifth season 2025/2026 return is $160,000, an amount of One hundred and sixty
thousand US dollars, distributed as follows:
The 1st installment: $40,000 only, an amount of forty thousand US dollars, to be paid on
09/01/2025
The 2nd installment: $8,000 only, an amount of eight thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/10/2025
The 3rd installment: $8,000 only, an amount of eight thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/11/2025
The 4th installment: $8,000 only, an amount of eight thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/12/2025
The 5th installment: $8,000 only, an amount of eight thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/01/2026
The 6th installment: $8,000 only, an amount of eight thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/02/2026
The 7th installment: $8,000 only, an amount of eight thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/03/2026
The 8th installment: $8,000 only, an amount of eight thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/04/2026
The 9th installment: $8,000 only, an amount of eight thousand US dollars, to be paid on
05/01/2026
The 10th installment: $8,000 only, an amount of eight thousand US US dollars, to be paid on
01/06/2026
pg. 6
REF. FPSD-8674
The 11th installment: $8,000 only, an amount of eight thousand US US dollars, to be paid on
01/07/2026
The 12th installment: $40,000 only, an amount of forty thousand US dollars, to be paid on
01/08/2026”
3.
According to the contract, the Respondent equally undertook to pay the Claimant:
a. a housing allowance of EGP 5,000 per month.
b. an incentive of USD 5,000 upon signing the contract.
4.
Clause 4 of the contract reads as follows:
“Fourth: Binding Terms:
[…]
The player shall bear the value of the taxes due on him for this contract and any other
qualitative rewards in accordance with the law, and the club shall deduct them from the
player's dues and remit them to taxes under his responsibility.”
5.
On 23 November 2022, the Claimant put the Respondent in default and requested payment
of the amounts detailed below. The player granted the club 15 days to cure its breach and
referred to art. 14bis of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (RSTP).
a. USD 28,000 corresponding to the instalments due on September, October and
November 2022;
b. USD 4,495 equal to EGP 110,000 corresponding to the housing allowances
between February 2021 and the date the default notice was sent.
6.
On 9 December 2022, the player stated that he terminated the contract. In this respect, the
player has filed no evidence of the termination and merely confirmed such date with
reference as 15 days after his default notice.
7.
On 19 December 2022, the player admits he “left the club and Egypt”. He remained
unemployed thereafter.
II. Proceedings before FIFA
8.
On 23 December 2022, the Claimant filed the claim at hand before FIFA.
9.
On 16 January 2023, the Respondent was invited to file its response to the claim of the
Claimant by 31 January 2023.
10. On 30 January 2023, the Respondent requested an extension of the aforementioned
deadline.
pg. 7
REF. FPSD-8674
11. On 31 January 2023, the FIFA general secretariat granted the requested deadline extension
until 10 February 2023, a Friday.
12. On 12 February 2023, the Respondent filed its reply and equally filed a counterclaim against
the Claimant. Since 10 February 2023 was a non-working day at the place of domicile of the
Respondent, such reply and counterclaim were timely filed in line with art. 11 par. 3 of the
Procedural Rules Governing the Football Tribunal; hereinafter: the Procedural Rules).
13. Because
the
Respondent’s
counterclaim
was
missing
mandatory
information/documentation in line with art. 18 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules, on 13
February 2023 the FIFA general secretariat requested the Respondent to complete its
counterclaim, namely with the details of a bank account registered in the name of the
claimant on a signed copy of the Bank Account Registration Form, by 17 February 2023, a
Friday.
14. On 13 February 2023, the Respondent filed a copy of the Bank Account Registration Form,
which was however still incomplete.
15. On 17 February 2023, the FIFA general secretariat informed the Respondent that such
specimen of the Bank Account Registration Form was incomplete and advised it to
complete it within the previously granted deadline. In particular, the Respondent was
requested to provide FIFA with “the details of a bank account registered in the name of the
counter-claimant on a signed copy of the Bank Account Registration Form (available on
fifa.com/legal) duly and entirely filled out with the full address of the counter-claimant and
with the correct indication of the name of the (counter-)claimant in the relevant area as a
legal person as opposed to a natural person”.
16. On 20 February 2023, the Respondent replied to the FIFA general secretariat and sent the
same specimen of the Bank Account Registration Form it had already sent on 13 February
2023.
17. On 27 February 2023, the FIFA general secretariat confirmed that the counterclaim had
been withdrawn.
18. A brief summary of the position of the parties is detailed in continuation.
a. Position of the Claimant
19. In his claim, the player argued that in the first season he received only USD 19,711, being
(a) USD 12,340 as salaries and (b) USD 7,371 equivalent to EGP 180,390. As such, the player
argued that the club did not pay USD 29,289 plus USD 5,000 (incentive) as it should have
done.
pg. 8
REF. FPSD-8674
20. As to the second season, the player argued that the player did not receive two salaries plus
the payment of USD 20,000, as well as the housing allowances for the period between
February 2021 and November 2022 amounting to EGP 110,000 or USD 4,495. It is to be
noted that the player refers to 2021 in spite of the fact that the contract started in 2022.
21. The player referred to art. 14bis RSTP and argued that the criteria enshrined therein was
met in the case at hand and therefore the player “can terminate the contract” and claim its
residual amount in line with art. 17 RSTP.
22. The requests for relief of the Claimant, were the following:
-
USD 57,784 “from the payments due for the first, second season and housing
allowance”;
USD 452,000 as compensation for breach of contract equal to the residual value of
the contract;
Fees and costs of the proceeding;
A registration ban on the club on the basis of art. 17 par. 4 RSTP.
b. Position of the Respondent
23. The club argued that the player did not have any remuneration pending and left the
country suddenly. Equally, the club highlighted that soon before that departure, the player
had refused to participate in activities with the club and was fined EGP 50,000.
24. In continuation, the club argued that it paid all his dues, and that the remuneration agreed
with the player was gross and not net, and therefore a deduction of 25% applied to such
remuneration based on clause 4 (6) of the contract. The club stated that it deducted these
amounts and paid the Egyptian tax authority. It is to be noted that the club filed copies of
the relevant excerpts of Egyptian Law and a letter from the Egyptian Football Association.
25. Furthermore, the club argued that the player’s salary was divided in a variable participation
per the contact, and stated as follows. It is to be noted however that the said cluse is not
found in the translation provided by the Claimant, which is the only one on file.
“v) The Player’s financial entitlements in Season 2021/2022
Based on all the above, the Player’s gross amounts for Season 2021/2022 amounting to USD
40,000 shall be subject to: (a) 25% Income Tax, (b) 25% participation rate, c) 25% for not
achieving one of the first ten places in the league table for the Season 2021/2022, d) EGP
50,000 as a sanction.
Accordingly, the Player’s NET amounts for the Season 2021/2022 (in addition to the USD 5,000
incentive net) shall be:
THE PLAYER’S GROSS DUES AS PER THE CONTRACT (Season 21/22): USD 40,000
pg. 9
REF. FPSD-8674
THE PLAYER’S INCOME TAX (25%) ON 40,000$ = USD 10,000
THE PLAYER’S 25% PARTICIPATION RATE (UNSATISFIED) ON 30,000$ = USD 7,500
THE CLUB’S RANK IN THE 11TH POSITION 25% ON 30,000$ = USD 7,500
THE PLAYER’S SANCTION OF EGP 50,000 = USD 3,175
THE PLAYER’S NET DUES = 40,000$ - (10,000$ + 7,500$ + 7,500$ + 3,175$) = USD 11,825 AFTER
ADDING THE USD 5,000 INCENTIVE NET: 11,825$ + 5,000$ = USD 16,825
v) The Player’s financial entitlements in Season 2022/2023 until the Player left the Club
The Player in his Claim requested the first three installments only of the Season 2022/2023 in
the aggregated GROSS value of USD 28,000 gross.
Accordingly, the Player’s NET amounts for the Season 2022/2023 until 12 December 2022
shall be:
THE PLAYER’S GROSS DUES AS PER THE CONTRACT (until 12 Dec 2022): USD 28,000
THE PLAYER’S INCOME TAX (25%) ON 28,000$ = USD 7,000
THE PLAYER’S 25% PARTICIPATION RATE (WITHHELD) ON 21,000$ = USD 5,250 S NET DUES =
28,000$ - (7,000$ + 5,250$) = USD 15,750”
26. On the basis of the foregoing, the club deems that the player did not have just cause to
terminate the contract. Alternatively, the club put forward the following arguments if the
Football Tribunal found otherwise:
The player shall not be entitled to any compensation as both the player and the club
were in default
Alternatively, any compensation should be mitigated on the basis of art. 337 of the
Swiss Code of Obligations.
In any case, any compensation payable shall be calculated net and not gross.
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
27. First of all, the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter also referred to as 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 23 December 2022 and
submitted for decision on 30 March 2023. Taking into account the wording of art. 34 of the
October 2022 edition of the Procedural Rules Governing the Football Tribunal (hereinafter:
the Procedural Rules), the aforementioned edition of the Procedural Rules is applicable to
the matter at hand.
pg. 10
REF. FPSD-8674
28. Subsequently, the members of 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 lit. b) of the
Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (October 2022 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 player from
Palestine and a club from Egypt.
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 (October 2022 edition), and
considering that the present claim was lodged on 23 December 2022, the October 2022
edition of said regulations (hereinafter: the Regulations) is applicable to the matter at hand
as to the substance.
b. Burden of proof
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. Its competence and the applicable regulations having been established, 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 the assessment of the matter at hand.
i. Main legal discussion and considerations
32. The foregoing having been established, the DRC moved to the substance of the matter, and
took note of the fact that the parties strongly dispute the justice of the early termination of
the contract by the Claimant, based on the alleged non-payment of certain financial
obligations by the Respondent as per the contract, in accordance with art. 14bis of the
Regulations.
33. In this context, the DRC acknowledged that its task was to determine, based on the
evidence presented by the parties, whether the claimed amounts had in fact remained
pg. 11
REF. FPSD-8674
unpaid by the Respondent and, if so, whether the formal pre-requisites of art. 14bis of the
Regulations had in fact been fulfilled.
34. The DRC then referred to the wording of art. 14bis par. 1 of the Regulations, in accordance
with which, if a club unlawfully fails to pay a player at least two monthly salaries on their
due dates, the player will be deemed to have a just cause to terminate his contract,
provided that he has put the debtor club in default in writing and has granted a deadline
of at least 15 days for the debtor club to fully comply with its financial obligation(s).
35. The DRC noted that the Claimant claims not having received his remuneration
corresponding to part of the first season as well as the salaries of November and December
2022, and all housing allowances. Furthermore, the Claimant has provided written evidence
of having put the Respondent in default on 23 November 2022, i.e., at least 15 days before
unilaterally terminating the contract on 9 December 2022. In this respect and considering
the wording of art. 14bis par. 2 of the Regulations, the DRC noted that the player requested
in his default notice the salaries of September, October and November – each due on the
first day of the month.
36. The DRC also noted that in the case at hand the Respondent bore the burden of proving
that it indeed complied with the financial terms of the contract concluded between the
parties. Nonetheless, the DRC was of the opinion that the evidence provided by the
Respondent does not prove the payment of the amounts claimed as outstanding by the
Claimant insofar as it does not account for any payments in October or November, except
for one document – document no. 11 – which appears dated 1 September 2022 but is
rather unclear, and even if it was to be considered, the DRC highlighted that the amount
listed therein was less than the USD 28,000 claimed, plus allowances.
37. On this note, the DRC stressed that it was not persuaded to a comfortable satisfaction
degree by the evidence of payment filed by the Respondent. In particular, the DRC stated
that from said evidence it is unclear what amounts and concepts the concerned proofs
referred to. Equally, the DRC found the translations unclear, and unable to confirm the
currency or deductions applied to each payment.
38. In continuation, the DRC turned to the issue of the disciplinary fine imposed on the
Claimant by the Respondent. In this respect, the Chamber found it decisive that the club
has provided only a letter confirming the imposed fine . In other words, the DRC underlined
that the club did not advance any evidence to demonstrate that: (i) the alleged disciplinary
proceeding was ever notified to the player; and (ii) the player had ever been invited (either
verbally or in written) to exercise his right to be heard in respect of the disciplinary
proceeding.
39. In light of the above, the Chamber recalled its well-established jurisprudence and decided
that the club’s position as to the disciplinary fines could not succeed.
pg. 12
REF. FPSD-8674
40. Lastly, the Chamber addressed the argument of the club in respect of the variable
remuneration of the player. In doing so, the Chamber deemed that it was necessary to first
analyse whether said reduction of the player’s salary made by the club was indeed lawful.
In this context, the Chamber highlighted that, in general, potestative clauses – i.e. clauses
dependent on an event which can only be triggered by one of the contractual parties and
upon the latter’s wish – cannot be applied, as they limit the rights of the contractual
counterparty in an excessive manner and lead to an unjustified disadvantage of the latter.
41. The Chamber understands that clause in question inserted in the contract is clearly
potestative as it unilaterally provides all the power to the club to decide upon a
considerable reduction of the player’s salary, since it is the club, at its sole discretion, who
decides if the player is fielded or not. In spite of the fact that the aforementioned clause is
included in a valid employment contract voluntarily signed by both parties, the Chamber
acknowledges the usual imbalance in the bargaining power of the employer and of the
employee and therefore decided that such clause has a clearly abusive nature and shall
not have any legal effect in the relevant employment relationship.
42. On account of the aforementioned considerations, the Chamber decided that the club’s
argumentation as to the reduction of the salaries could not subsist, and that the
Respondent been in breach of its obligations for a significant period of time. Therefore, the
player had a just cause on the grounds of art. 14bis of the Regulations to unilaterally
terminate the contract and the club should be held liable for the breach of the employment
contract and its early termination.
ii. Consequences
43. 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.
44. In doing so, the DRC underlined that it first must assess if the remuneration payable to the
player is net or gross. From the contents of the contract, the DRC concluded that the
player’s remuneration established therein would be paid gross and the corresponding
deductions would be made by the club, who would subsequently pay the deducted
amounts to the tax authorities. Pursuant to the evidence filed by the club, any player
earning more than EGP 400,000 would be subject to a tax rate of 25%.
45. The Chamber proceeded to examine the evidence filed by the club, and noted not only the
excerpts from the Egyptian tax code, which were further supported by a letter from the
Egyptian Football Association, but also the many receipts of payments made to the local
tax authorities. Contrarily to the evidence regarding salary payments, the Chamber was
comfortably satisfied with the evidence provided to demonstrate the percentage of the
reduction as well as the corresponding payment of taxes, which had been performed in
respect of other salaries previously due to the player. Therefore, the Chamber decided that
pg. 13
REF. FPSD-8674
the amounts sought as outstanding should be paid net to the player, on the basis detailed
in continuation.
46. 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 amounts
which were outstanding under the contract at the moment of the termination.
47. 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 one day after their respective due dates
until the date of effective payment.
Concept
Period
Salaries first half-season
Feb to Aug-22
Incentive
Currency
Amount Gross
Amount net
Due date
USD
29,289
21,966.75
30/08/2022
n/a
USD
5,000
3,750
25/01/2022
Housing allowance
Feb-22
EGP
5,000
3,750
01/02/2022
Housing allowance
Mar-22
EGP
5,000
3,750
01/03/2022
Housing allowance
Apr-22
EGP
5,000
3,750
01/04/2022
Housing allowance
May-22
EGP
5,000
3,750
01/05/2022
Housing allowance
Jun-22
EGP
5,000
3,750
01/06/2022
Housing allowance
Jul-22
EGP
5,000
3,750
01/07/2022
Housing allowance
Aug-22
EGP
5,000
3,750
01/08/2022
Housing allowance
Sep-22
EGP
5,000
3,750
01/09/2022
Housing allowance
Oct-22
EGP
5,000
3,750
01/10/2022
Housing allowance
Nov-22
EGP
5,000
3,750
01/11/2022
Housing allowance
Dec-22
EGP
5,000
3,750
01/12/2022
Salary
Sep-22
USD
20,000
15,000
01/09/2022
Salary
Oct-22
USD
4,000
3,000
01/10/2022
Salary
Nov-22
USD
4,000
3,000
01/11/2022
Salary
Dec-22
USD
4,000
3,000
01/12/2022
48. Having stated the above, the Chamber turned to the calculation of the amount of
compensation payable to the player by the club in the case at stake. In doing so, the
Chamber firstly recapitulated that, in accordance with art. 17 par. 1 of the Regulations, the
amount of compensation shall be calculated, in particular and unless otherwise provided
for in the contract at the basis of the dispute, with due consideration for the law of the
country concerned, the specificity of sport and further objective criteria, including in
particular, the remuneration and other benefits due to the player under the existing
contract and/or the new contract, the time remaining on the existing contract up to a
maximum of five years, and depending on whether the contractual breach falls within the
protected period.
pg. 14
REF. FPSD-8674
49. In application of the relevant provision, the Chamber held that it first of all had to clarify as
to whether the pertinent employment contract contained a provision by means of which
the parties had beforehand agreed upon an amount of compensation payable by the
contractual parties in the event of breach of contract. In this regard, the Chamber
established that no such compensation clause was included in the employment contract at
the basis of the matter at stake.
50. As a consequence, the members of the Chamber determined that the amount of
compensation payable by the club to the player had to be assessed in application of the
other parameters set out in art. 17 par. 1 of the Regulations. The Chamber recalled that
said provision provides for a non-exhaustive enumeration of criteria to be taken into
consideration when calculating the amount of compensation payable.
51. Bearing in mind the foregoing as well as the claim of the player, the Chamber proceeded
with the calculation of the monies payable to the player under the terms of the contract
from the date of its unilateral termination until its end date. Consequently, the Chamber
concluded that the amount of USD 448,000 plus EGP 220,000 (i.e., the residual value of the
contract) serves as the basis for the determination of the amount of compensation for
breach of contract. In this respect, the DRC clarified that the taxation regime applied to the
outstanding remuneration could not be replicated here, since the player had already left
Egypt and no evidence was presented by the club to confirm that he was still a tax resident
in that country. Equally, there was no evidence on file to denote that the regime of taxation
in Egypt for compensation (i.e., indemnity) applied equally as to salaries. On this basis, the
DRC confirmed that it would undertake the calculation of the compensation on the basis
of the player’s earnings as stated in the contract.
52. In continuation, the Chamber verified as to whether the player had signed an employment
contract with another club during the relevant period of time, by means of which he would
have been enabled to reduce his loss of income. According to the constant practice of the
DRC as well as art. 17 par. 1 lit. ii) of the Regulations, such remuneration under a new
employment contract shall be taken into account in the calculation of the amount of
compensation for breach of contract in connection with the player’s general obligation to
mitigate his damages.
53. Indeed, the player remained unemployed. As such, the Chamber referred to art. 17 par. 1
lit. ii) of the Regulations, according to which a player is entitled to an amount corresponding
to three monthly salaries as additional compensation should the termination of the
employment contract at stake be due to overdue payables. In the case at hand, the
Chamber confirmed that the contract termination took place due to said reason i.e.,
overdue payables by the club, but since no mitigation took place, no additional
compensation was to be awarded.
54. Consequently, on account of all of the above-mentioned considerations and the
specificities of the case at hand, the Chamber decided that the club must pay the amount
pg. 15
REF. FPSD-8674
of USD 448,000 plus EGP 220,000 to the player, which was considered a reasonable and
justified amount of compensation for breach of contract in the present matter.
55. Lastly, taking into consideration the player’s request as well as the constant practice of the
Chamber in this regard, the latter decided to award the player interest on said
compensation at the rate of 5% p.a. as of the date of termination of the contract until the
date of effective payment.
iii. Compliance with monetary decisions
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.
pg. 16
REF. FPSD-8674
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. 17
REF. FPSD-8674
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Khaled Al Nabrasi, is partially accepted.
2.
The Respondent, Ismaily SC, must pay to the Claimant the following amount(s):
a. USD 3,750 net as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 26 January
2022 until the date of effective payment;
b. USD 21,966.75 net as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 31 August
2022 until the date of effective payment;
c. EGP 3,750 net as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 February
2022 until the date of effective payment;
d. EGP 3,750 net as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 March 2022
until the date of effective payment;
e. EGP 3,750 net as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 April 2022
until the date of effective payment;
f. EGP 3,750 net as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 May 2022
until the date of effective payment;
g. EGP 3,750 net as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 June 2022
until the date of effective payment;
h. EGP 3,750 net as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 July 2022
until the date of effective payment;
i. EGP 3,750 net as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 August 2022
until the date of effective payment;
j. EGP 3,750 net as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 September
2022 until the date of effective payment;
k. EGP 3,750 net as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 October
2022 until the date of effective payment;
l. EGP 3,750 net as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 November
2022 until the date of effective payment;
m. EGP 3,750 net as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 December
2022 until the date of effective payment;
n. USD 15,000 net as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 September
2022 until the date of effective payment;
o. USD 4,000 net as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 October
2022 until the date of effective payment;
p. USD 4,000 net as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 November
2022 until the date of effective payment;
q. USD 4,000 net as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 December
2022 until the date of effective payment.
r. USD 448,000 plus EGP 220,000 as compensation for breach of contract without just
cause plus 5% interest p.a. as from 19 December 2022 until the date of effective
payment.
pg. 18
REF. FPSD-8674
3.
Any further claims of the Claimant are rejected.
4.
Full payment (including all applicable interest) shall be made to the bank account indicated
in the enclosed Bank Account Registration Form.
5.
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.
6.
The consequences shall only be enforced at the request of the Claimant in accordance
with art. 24 par. 7 and 8 and art. 25 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players.
7.
This decision is rendered without costs.
For the Football Tribunal:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
pg. 19
REF. FPSD-8674
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. 20