Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF. FPSD-13062
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 7 March 2024
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning
the player Lisandro Joel Alzugaray
COMPOSITION:
Lívia SILVA KÄGI (Brazil & Switzerland), Deputy Chairwoman
Mario FLORES CHEMOR (Mexico), member
Roy VERMEER (The Netherlands), member
CLAIMANT:
Lisandro Joel Alzugaray, Argentina
Represented by SPL Sport Sàrl
RESPONDENT:
Universidad Católica del Ecuador, Ecuador
pg. 2
REF. FPSD-13062
I. Facts of the case
1.
On 29 December 2021, the Argentinian player, Lisandro Joel Alzugaray (hereinafter: the
player or the Claimant) and the Ecuadorian club, Universidad Católica del Ecuador
(hereinafter: the club or the Respondent) concluded an employment contract, valid as from
8 January 2022 until the end of the season 2023 (hereinafter: the contract).
2.
Clause 6 of the contract reads as follows:
“[…] El FUTBOLISTA declara que por el tiempo de duración de contrato EL CLUB es
dueño del 100% de los derechos federativos y el 70% de los derechos económicos,
reservándose para EL FUTBOLISTA el 30% restante que, conforme al acuerdo de Las
Partes ya incluye el valor del 15% que da FIFA y/o Ley de Futbolista las otorgue.
En el evento que los derechos deportivos, económicos o federativos del FUTBOLISTA
sean transferidos provisional o temporalmente o cedidos bajo la modalidad de
préstamo de manera temporal, el precio y las condiciones de la transferencia o cesión
serán acordados en otro contrato denominado Cesion de Derechos entre los clubes
cesionarios y el cedente con EL FUTBOLISTA. Sin la suscripción del antes indicado
contrato, las partes contratantes acuerdan que ningún otro club podrá contar con los
servicios prestados del FUTBOLISTA […]”
Freely translated to English
"[...] The player declares that for the duration of the contract the club is the owner of
100% of the federative rights and 70% of the economic rights, reserving the remaining
30% for the player which, according to the agreement between the parties already
includes the value of 15% that FIFA and/or the Football Player Law grants them.
In the event that the player's sporting, economic or federative rights are provisionally
or temporarily transferred or assigned in the form of a temporary loan, the price and
conditions of the transfer or assignment shall be agreed in another contract called
"Transfer of Rights" between the transferee clubs and the club with the player. Without
the execution of the aforementioned contract, the parties agree that no other club will
be able to count on the services provided by the player [...]"
3.
Clause 15 of the contract stipulates the following:
“La relación contractual surgida entre las partes de este contrato se rige por la
Constitución de la República del Ecuador y las demás normas laborales nacionales
que resulten aplicables, las reglamentaciones emitidas, primero, por la Federación
pg. 3
REF. FPSD-13062
Ecuatoriana de Fútbol y segundo por la Federación Internacional de Fútbol Asociado
FIFA”.
Freely translated to English:
"The contractual relationship established between the parties through this contract is
governed by the Constitution of the Republic of Ecuador and further applicable
national labour law, the regulations issued primarily by the Ecuadorian Football
Federation and secondarily by the Fédération Internationale de Football Association
FIFA”.
4.
Clause 16 of the contract reads as follows:
“RESCISIÓN Y/O INDEMNIZACIÓN
EL FUTBOLISTA podrá rescindir el presente contrato, en cualquier momento y de
forma anticipada a su vencimiento, pagando directamente al Club, y no a través de
interpuesta persona, la cantidad de USD. 700.000,00 (SETECIENTOS MIL DÓLARES DE
LOS ESTADOS UNIDOS DE AMÉRICA CON 00/100), en cuyo caso el CLUB, a la fecha de
recepción del pago entregará sin más trámite que el que se indica en esta cláusula la
liberación del FUTBOLISTA bajo cualquier forma documentada.”
Freely translated to English
"Termination and/or compensation
The player may terminate this contract, at any time and prior its expiration, by paying
directly to the club, and not through an intermediary, the amount of USD 700,000.00
(seven hundred thousand united states dollars with 00/100), in which case the club,
on the date of receipt of payment will deliver without further formality than that the
release of the player under any documented form".
5.
Reportedly, on 27 July 2022, the Saudi Arabian club, Al Ahli FC (hereinafter: Al Ahli) sent a
letter to the club, requesting authorization for the player to travel to Türkiye to pass
medical examinations.
6.
On the same date, the club replied to Al Ahli the following (quoted verbatim):
“In reference to your letter received on July 27th, 2022, through this, the Club
Universidad Católica del Ecuador, owner of the sport, economic and federative rights
of the player Lisandro Alzugaray, confers express authorization to the player Lisandro
Alzugaray to travel to Turkey in order to do and complete medical examination and
finalize all the contractual terms between the player and Al-Ahli Football Club in
accordance with the permanent transfer proposed by Al-Ahli Football Club.
pg. 4
REF. FPSD-13062
This authorization is for a specific period of 8 days from the day of air ticket issuance.
Al-Ahli Football Club or the player will cover all travel, accommodation and food costs
of the player during this period.
Al-Ahli Football Club and the player must inform immediately to Universidad Católica
del Ecuador any relevant decision related to the interest of Al-Ahli of a permanent
transfer of the player Lisandro Alzugaray or a labor contract between Al-Ahli Football
Club and the player Lisandro Alzugaray.
The player will not be able to sign an employment contract with Al-Ahli Football Club
until he and Al-Ahli Football Club negotiate the terms of the termination of his contract
with Universidad Católica del Ecuador.”
7.
On 30 July 2022, Al Ahli sent to the club the following letter:
“Referring to your consent to our request stated in our Letter of Interest dated on July
29, 2022 regarding acquiring the services of the Player Lisandra Alzugaray on a
permanent transfer to AlAhli, we hereby would like to assure your approval and
consent be providing us with your written approval allowing the above mentioned
player to travel to AlAhli FC' s camp in Turkey in order to do and complete the medical
examination to the satisfaction of AlAhli medical team and to meet the medical
requirements. Hence, to finalize all the contractual terms with the player.
Such letter that issued to the aforementioned player shall be limited to proceed with
the aforementioned procedures. Any documentation and / or agreements without
signature of AlAhli FC shall be deemed as invalid.”
8.
On 31 July 2022, the player sent to the club the following letter (quoted verbatim):
“Yo Lisandra Joel Alzugaray, de nacionalidad argentina, pasaporte número […],
jugador profesional de futbol, comunico al Club Universidad Catolica de Ecuador la
rescisión de mi contrato por la cláusula estipulada de salida de 700,000 USD dólares
americanos a transferirse con los siguientes datos de la cuenta […]”
Freely translated to English
“I, Lisandra Joel Alzugaray, of Argentinian nationality, passport number […],
professional football player, communicate to the Club Universidad Catolica de
pg. 5
REF. FPSD-13062
Ecuador the termination of my contract for the stipulated exit clause of USD 700,000
to be transferred with the following account information […]”
9.
On the same date, the club replied to the player the following (quoted verbatim):
“Por medio de la presente, en referencia a su correo de fecha 31 de julio de 2022,
conforme nos ha sido informado respecto a que el pago del valor estipulado en la
cláusula décimo sexta del Contrato Único de Trabajo suscrito el 29 de diciembre de
2021, por la cantidad total de USD. 700.000,00 (SETECIENTOS MIL DÓLARES DE LOS
ESTADOS UNIDOS DE AMÉRICA), por el concepto de la rescisión anticipada y unilateral
del contrato por voluntad del jugador, se realizará a través del Al-Ahli Football Club,
manifestamos no mostrar oposición en que el pago que le corresponde a Usted se
realice por medio del Al-Ahli Football Club a las cuentas bancarias del Club
Universidad Católica del Ecuador, sin que por esta intervención pueda considerarse,
por ningún medio, como una venta o cesión definitiva negociada o pre acordada de
sus derechos deportivos, federativos y económicos por parte del Club Universidad
Católica del Ecuador.
Universidad Católica del Ecuador se reserva el derecho de reclamar contra Usted y el
Al-Ahli Football Club el valor estipulado en la cláusula décimo sexta del Contrato Único
de Trabajo si dentro del plazo de cuarenta y ocho horas hábiles dicho valor no fuere
acreditado a la cuenta bancaria del Club.”
Freely translated to English
“We hereby refer to your letter dated 31 July 2022, as we have been informed that the
payment of the value stipulated in the clause 16 of the contract signed on 29
December 2021, for the total amount of USD 700,000 (SEVEN HUNDRED THOUSAND
UNITED STATES DOLLARS), for the concept of the early and unilateral termination of
the contract by the player, will be made by Al-Ahli Football Club, we declare that we
do not object to the payment is made by Al-Ahli Football Club to the bank accounts of
the [club], without this intervention being considered, by any means, as a sale or
definitive negotiated or pre-agreed transfer of your sporting, federative and economic
rights by the [club].
[The club] reserves the right to claim against you and Al-Ahli Football Club the amount
stipulated in clause sixteen of the contract if within forty-eight working hours said
amount is not credited to the club's bank account.”
10. On 1 August 2022, the player signed a contract with Al Ahli.
11. On 25 August 2022, Al Ahli paid the club the amount of USD 700,000.
pg. 6
REF. FPSD-13062
12. In accordance with the Transfer Matching System (TMS), the following transfer was
registered:
13. On 17 October 2023, the player put the club in default of payment of USD 210,000
corresponding to his economic rights pursuant to clause 6 of the Contract, setting a 10days’ time limit to remedy the default.
14. On 18 October 2023, the club replied to the player, rejecting that any amount was due as
no transfer agreement had been concluded; that the player informed the club of the
application of clause 16; and that any co-ownership of economic rights ceased at the same
time as the contract was terminated.
15. On 13 November 2023, the player replied to the club, contesting the club's position and
requesting payment of USD 210,000 plus USD 13,779.45 as interests within the next 10
days. In particular, he stated that:
-
Neither the letter of 31 July 2023 nor clause 16 of the contract differentiated between
compensation and transfer price and did not change the fact that the player was
transferred from the club to Al Ahly.
-
The club agreed to the transfer of the player as stated in the letter dated 27 July 2022.
The intention of all parties involved was a permanent transfer and the club definitely
acted as such by agreeing to the permanent transfer of the player. If this was not the
intention of the parties, it is not understandable that there was an exchange of
emails between the two clubs and that the club set out the conditions in its letter of
27 July 2022. Whether or not the player was subsequently registered as a free agent
via FIFA TMS was irrelevant.
-
Clause 16 must be regarded as a termination clause, as it allows the parties to
unilaterally terminate the contract before its expiry. Therefore, the club pre-agreed
the transfer of the player in clause 16 of the contract.
16. On 16 November 2023, the club replied to the player stating that its position remained
unchanged and that it did not share the player's interpretation of the clause.
II. Proceedings before FIFA
pg. 7
REF. FPSD-13062
17. On 15 December 2023, the Claimant 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
18. The player requested the payment of USD 210,000 corresponding to the economic rights
of 30% mentioned in clause 6 of the contract. The player considered that his move to Al
Ahli should be classified as a transfer for the following reasons:
-
The player referred to the decision of the Court of Arbitration for Sports CAS
2019/A/6525 and indicated that “a transfer can take many forms and that it generally
means a change of employer by means of which a player, registered to play for a club,
becomes an employee and eligible to play for a different club, it goes without saying that
the incorporation of the Player with Al Ahli falls within such general definition and
constitutes a transfer”.
-
The transfer of the player was the object and the purpose of the parties’ agreement
as per clause 16 of the contract and the emails sent on 27 and 29 July 2022. The
transfer was “made […] (ii) by way of termination of the employment agreement with the
old club and signature of a new employment agreement with the new club. In both cases,
the old club expresses its agreement (to the assignment or to the termination of the old
employment contract, as the case may be) against the receipt of a payment – which
compensates for the loss of the player’s services”.
-
Clause 16 of the contract is similar to the wording of the rights granted to football
players in Spain and that in various cases, both FIFA and the CAS (namely CAS
2019/A/6525, CAS 2021/A/8543 and CAS 2021/A/8827) confirmed that a move of a
player pursuant to a “clausula de rescisión" constituted a transfer.
-
The constitutive elements mentioned in CAS jurisprudence (namely CAS
2011/A/2356) for the move to be considered a transfer were fulfilled:
“(i) Católica agreed to the early termination of the contract, not once but twice, namely
by including Article 16 in the Employment Contract and by means of its letter dated
27 July 2021 accepting Al Ahli’s offer for the permanent transfer of the Player,
(ii) Al Ahli wanted to obtain the Player’s services, as evidenced by its offer dated 27 July
2022 and its further letter dd. 29 July 2022,
(iii). The Player consented to move from Católica to Al Ahli,
(iv) Católica had set and received money for the transaction, money which Católica in
its letter dated 31 July 2022 indicated could be paid directly to it by Al Ahli – an option
which was not even contemplated in Article 16 of the Employment Contract.”
pg. 8
REF. FPSD-13062
-
The registration of the player as free agent in the TMS is “irrelevant from a regulatory
perspective because it does not change the regulatory qualification of the move as a
transfer nor the real intentions of the parties. Irrelevant for what concerns the Player as
these are subsequent acts of third parties over which he had no influence whatsoever”.
-
“The Economic Rights retained by the Player in the Employment Contract and the rights
retained by a selling club in a sell-on clause, work in exactly the same way. They both
allow, respectively the Player or a club, as holder of certain % of economic rights over a
player’s registration, the right to participate in the compensation payable in relation to a
future transfer, and this pursuant to and in compliance with article 18ter of the FIFA
RSTP.”
19. In view of the foregoing, the player is entitled to 30% of the transfer fee as agreed in clause
6 of the contract.
20. As to the applicable law, the Claimant mentioned that the following applied:
“- the FIFA Statutes and FIFA Regulations, including the FIFA RSTP and more specifically article
12bis and 24 related to overdue payables;
- Swiss law, for all matters concerns the standard of industry that are not covered in the FIFA
RSTP or need to be interpreted;
- Ecuadorian law for what concerns the due interests.”
21. The player requested the following relief:
“i. to hold that :
a) it has jurisdiction to hear this complaint;
b) this complaint is admissible;
c) C.D. Universidad Católica del Ecuador breached its payment obligations contained in
the Employment Contract as per Article 6 and the Economic Rights clause contained
therein;
d) the conditions of article 12bis of the FIFA RSTP are met and that therefore C.D.
Universidad Católica del Ecuador has violated article 12bis of the RSTP;
ii. To order C.D. Universidad Católica del Ecuador to pay to the Player:
pg. 9
REF. FPSD-13062
a) the amount of USD 210,000 net plus interests as follows:
In primary order, pursuant to Ecuadorian law
i. 16% interests p.a. as of the 26th of August 2022 until the date of effective payment;
In subsidiary order, pursuant to Swiss law
ii. 5% interests as of the 26th of August 2022 until the date of effective payment; iii. to
impose the appropriate sanction on C.D. Universidad Católica del Ecuador in line with
Article 12bis para 4 and 6 of the FIFA RSTP
iv. to impose a temporary transfer ban on C.D. Universidad Católica del Ecuador pursuant
to Article 24 of the FIFA RSTP up until the full payment of the to be issued decision by the
FIFA DRC
v. to order that C.D. Universidad Católica del Ecuador shall carry all the costs of the present
procedure.
b. Position of the Respondent
22. The Respondent failed to submit its position within the timeframe stipulated.
pg. 10
REF. FPSD-13062
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
23. 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 15 December 2023 and
submitted for decision on 7 March 2024. Taking into account the wording of art. 34 of the
March 2023 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.
24. 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 par. lit. b)
of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (February 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 an Argentinian
player and a Ecuadorian club.
25. Furthermore, 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 (February 2024 edition), and
considering that the present claim was lodged on 15 December 2023, the May 2023 edition
of said regulations (hereinafter: the Regulations) is applicable to the matter at hand as to
the substance.
26. For sake of clarity, the Chamber remarked that the player referred in his submissions that
Ecuadorian law is applicable to the interests. In this respect, the Chamber wished to recall
that when deciding a dispute before the DRC, FIFA’s regulations prevail over any national
law that the parties might have chosen. In this regard, the Chamber emphasised that the
main objective of the FIFA regulations is to create a standard set of rules to which all the
actors within the football community are subject to and can rely on. This objective would
not be achievable if the Chamber would have to apply the national law of a specific party
on every dispute brought to it. By the same token, the Chamber wished to point out that it
is in the interest of football that the cases are based on uniform criteria rather than on
provisions of national law that may vary considerably from country to country. Therefore,
the Chamber deemed that it is not appropriate to apply the principles of a particular
national law but rather the Regulations, general principles of law and, where existing, the
Chamber’s well-established jurisprudence.
b. Burden of proof
pg. 11
REF. FPSD-13062
27. 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 TMS.
c. Merits of the dispute
28. The 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
29. The foregoing having been established, the Chamber moved to the substance of the
matter, and took note that the Claimant requested the payment of USD 210,000 in
accordance with clause 6 of the contract.
30. In continuation, the Chamber took note that the Respondent failed to present its reply to
the claim within the deadline granted by the FIFA General Secretariat which therefore
cannot be admitted to the file.Therefore the decision will be taken only on the basis of the
argumentation and evidence filed by the Claimant , in line with article 14 par. 1 of the
Procedural Rules.
31. In doing so, the Chamber observed that:
-
The club granted permission to the player to travel to Türkiye for medical
examinations.
-
The player notified the termination of the contract triggering clause 16 of the
contract.
-
The club acknowledged the termination and stated that it did not object to Al Ahli
paying the amount on the player's behalf, stating in particular that:
"sin que por esta intervención pueda considerarse, por ningún medio, como una venta
o cesión definitiva negociada o pre acordada de sus derechos deportivos, federativos
y económicos por parte del Club Universidad Católica del Ecuador". Universidad
pg. 12
REF. FPSD-13062
Católica del Ecuador se reserva el derecho de reclamar contra Usted y el Al-Ahli
Football Club el valor estipulado en la cláusula".
Freely translated to English
“without this intervention being considered, by any means, as a definitive transfer or
pre-agreed transfer of your sporting, federative and economic rights by the [the
club]". [The club] reserves the right to claim against [the player] and Al-Ahli Football
Club the value stipulated in the clause the transfer of [the player’s] sporting,
federative and economic rights".
-
The payment of USD 700,000 was made by Al Ahli.
32. In continuation, the Chamber underlined that it is undisputed that the player had a
contractual entitlement of 30% of the economic rights as specified in clause 6 of the
contract. The Chamber also noted that the contract did not provide a definition of
“economic rights”.
33. Equally, the Chamber referred to clause 16 of the contract, which enabled the player to
terminate the contract by paying the amount of USD 700,000. The Chamber emphasized
that this clause constitutes a "buy-out" clause which grants a right to the player to
terminate the contractual relationship prematurely in return for payment of a
predetermined sum that is stipulated in the contract. In this case, the Chamber highlighted
that the parties are not setting an amount of compensation to be paid to compensate for
a breach, but rather are agreeing in advance upon the conditions of a ”mutual termination”,
i.e., consent is given in advance to terminate the contract in the future in return for a
specified payment (cf. 2023 edition of the Commentary on the Regulations). To elaborate
further, the Chamber pointed out that the key difference between a buy-out clause and a
clause setting an amount as compensation (usually called liquidated damages clause) is
that in the former case the club is granting its consent beforehand for the transfer of the
player upon the payment of a specific amount. For the sake of completeness, the Chamber
also recalled that another important difference is that the trigger of a buy-out clause
cannot result in sporting sanctions being imposed, contrary to the exercise of a liquidated
damages clause which may cause the DRC to impose sporting sanctions on the relevant
party (given that it effectively constitutes a termination of contract without just cause).
34. Furthermore, the Chamber recalled the wording of the commentary on the Regulations,
which stipulated that (page 420):
“the DRC has consistently concluded that the solidarity contribution is due whenever
a player moves between two clubs after triggering their buy-out clause. Specifically,
the sum stipulated in the buy-out clause is considered as an offer by the releasing club
to release the player for transfer in return for the payment of the amount concerned.
If the player or another club accepts this offer by unconditionally paying the amount
pg. 13
REF. FPSD-13062
stipulated and the player then transfers between clubs, this payment effectively
constitutes a transfer fee, and solidarity payments should be deducted from the
transfer compensation paid.”
35. Indeed, the Chamber emphasised that even if the present case was not related to the
payment of solidarity contribution, a clear analogy could be made in the analysis of the
present matter.
36. In the present case, the Chamber observed that (i) the buyout clause (i.e., clause 16 of the
contract) was triggered, (ii) it was Al Ahly who paid to the club the amount of USD 700,000
and not the player, and (iii) the player was released from the club to a third club (Al Ahly).
In the Chamber’s opinion, such constellation has the same legal effects as if the player
would have been transferred by means of a transfer agreement whereby the amount of
USD 700,000 would have constituted a transfer fee.
37. In that regard, the Chamber also emphasised that the club was the drafter of the contract
and that there is no explanation whatsoever about the correlation, if any, between clauses
16 and 7 of the contract. In other words, it is not possible to ascertain what was the real
intention of the parties when agreeing to those clauses. The Chamber further noted that
although invited to do so, the Respondent also failed to provide its position in these
proceedings therewith not even putting forward an explanation of what in its view the
intention of the clauses was. While it indeed seems slightly unusual that the player was
entitled to receive a portion of the buy-out fee that he himself could trigger, the Chamber
was of the view that if the parties would have wanted to exclude the application of clause
6 of the contract in case the player exercises clause 16, then this should have been clearly
established in the contract. However, it was not and, as the drafter of the contract, the club
must bear the consequences of that ambiguity.
38. Thus, to summarise: (i) the player was entitled to 30% of his economic rights, which is
basically a sell-on fee granted by the club to the player; (ii) clause 16 of the contract
constitutes a buy-out clause in favour of the player; (iii) the exercise of a buy-out clause
has, in general, the same legal effects than a regular transfer made on the basis of a
transfer agreement; and (iv) the contract does not stipulate that the percentage due as per
clause 6 would not apply in case clause 16 is exercised. The Chamber also recalled that it
was Al Ahli who finally paid the buy-out fee. It follows therefore that there is no legal reason
– again on the basis of the elements at the Chamber’s disposal – to deny the player’s right
to receive his share of the economic rights, pursuant to clause 6 of the contract.
39. Consequently, the Chamber in strict application of clause 6 of the contract and the
jurisprudence of the Football Tribunal concluded that the player is entitled to USD 210,000
(i.e., 30 % of the buy-out fee).
pg. 14
REF. FPSD-13062
40. 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 him interest at the rate of 5% p.a. on
the outstanding amount as from 26 August 2022.
ii. Compliance with monetary decisions
41. 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.
42. 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.
43. 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.
44. 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.
45. 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
46. 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.
47. 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.
pg. 15
REF. FPSD-13062
48. Lastly, the DRC concluded its deliberations by rejecting any other requests for relief made
by any of the parties.
pg. 16
REF. FPSD-13062
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Lisandro Joel Alzugaray, is partially accepted.
2.
The Respondent, Universidad Católica del Ecuador, must pay to the Claimant the following
amounts:
-
USD 210,000 as outstanding amount plus 5% interest p.a. as from 26 August 2022
until the date of effective payment.
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. 17
REF. FPSD-13062
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. 18