Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF FPSD-7871
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 24 November 2022
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the player Lamjed
Ameur
BY:
Jon Newman (USA), Single Judge of the DRC
CLAIMANT:
Lamjed Ameur, Tunisia
Represented by Slim Boulesnam
RESPONDENT:
Al Helal Sporting, Libya
Page 2
REF FPSD-7871
I. Facts of the case
1.
On 4 October 2021, the Tunisian player, Mr Lamjed Ameur (hereinafter: the player or the
Claimant) and the Libyan club, Al Helal Sporting (hereinafter: the club or the Respondent)
concluded an employment contract (hereinafter: the contract), valid as from the date of
its signature until the end of the 2021/2022 season in Libya (according to the information
displayed in the Transfer Matching System (TMS), the said season ended on 31 May 2022).
2.
According to clause 3 of the contract, the club undertook to pay to the player, inter alia,
the following fixed remuneration:
-
USD 10,000 as sign-on fee, payable upon receipt of the player’s International
Transfer Certificate (ITC);
-
USD 25,000 divided into 10 monthly salaries of USD 2,500 each.
3.
By means of his letter dated 1 October 2022, the player put the club in default of payment
in the amount of USD 17,500, corresponding to the salaries due between November 2021
and May 2022 in the amount of USD 2,500 each, thereby granting the club a 10 days’
deadline to remedy the default.
4.
On 9 October 2022, the club replied thereto, contesting the allegations of the player that
the amounts claimed by him were outstanding
II. Proceedings before FIFA
a. Position of the Claimant
5.
On 15 October 2022, the player lodged a claim against the club before FIFA, requesting to
be awarded outstanding remuneration in the amount of USD 17,500 -corresponding to
the salaries due as from November 2021 until May 2022 in the amount of USD 2,500 eachplus 5% interest p.a. as from the respective due dates until the date of effective payment.
6.
In his claim, the player explained that despite having validly entered into an employment
contract and having put the club in default of payment, the latter failed to pay the
amounts due to him as per the contract.
b. Position of the Respondent
7.
In its reply, the club held that, out of the amount of USD 35,000, it paid the player the full
sign-on fee (USD 10,000), as well as the amount of USD 12,500 pertaining to monthly
salaries.
Page 3
REF FPSD-7871
8.
In addition, the club held that it had to deduct 3% of the player’s annual salary to pay a
registration fee in front of the Libyan Football Federation (USD 1,050) (note: no evidence
provided).
9.
Thus, the club argued that it only owes the player the amount of USD 10,750 (35,000 –
(10,000 + 12,500 + 1,050) = 10,750).
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
1.
First of all, the Single Judge of the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter the Single
Judge) analysed whether he was competent to deal with the case at hand. In this respect,
he took note that the present matter was presented to FIFA on 15 October 2022 and
submitted for decision on 24 November 2022. 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.
2.
Subsequently, the Single Judge 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 Tunisian player
and a Libyan club.
3.
Subsequently, the Single Judge analysed which regulations should be applicable as to the
substance of the matter. In this respect, he 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 15 October 2022, the July 2022
edition of said regulations (hereinafter: the Regulations) is applicable to the matter at hand
as to the substance.
b. Burden of proof
4.
The Single Judge 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 Single Judge
stressed the wording of art. 13 par. 4 of the Procedural Rules, pursuant to which he may
consider evidence not filed by the parties, including without limitation the evidence
generated by or within the Transfer Matching System (TMS).
Page 4
REF FPSD-7871
c. Merits of the dispute
5.
His competence and the applicable regulations having been established, the Single Judge
entered into the merits of the dispute. In this respect, the Single Judge started by
acknowledging all the above-mentioned facts as well as the arguments and the
documentation on file. However, the Single Judge emphasised that, in the following
considerations, he 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
6.
The foregoing having been established, the Single Judge moved to the substance of the
matter and recalled that the Claimant requests to be awarded outstanding remuneration
in the amount of USD 17,500 from the Respondent, plus interest, the Claimant
maintaining that the Respondent failed to comply with its financial obligations towards
the player despite having validly entered into an employment contract and despite the
fact that the player put the club in default of payment.
7.
Equally, the Single Judge noted that, on its part, the club maintained that it partially paid
the player’s dues and acknowledged owing the player the amount of USD 10,750.
8.
In this context, the Single Judge noted that, despite the club arguing that it paid the total
amount of USD 22,500 to the player and that it rightfully deducted the amount of USD
1,050 as registration fee to be paid in front of the Libyan FA, the Respondent has not
provided any evidence in support of its allegations that it performed any of the
abovementioned payments. Consequently and on the basis of art. 13 para. 5 of the
Procedural Rules, the Single Judge determined that the allegations of the Respondent
need to be rejected, as it did not meet its standard of proof.
9.
In addition, as for the alleged entitlement of the club to deduct 3% of the player’s
contractual remuneration (USD 1,050) to pay a registration fee before the Libyan FA, the
Single Judge underscored that there is no contractual provision foreseeing any such
deduction and the club has also failed to provide any further evidence (such as the
eventually applicable Regulations from the Libyan FA) and, hence, the argument of the
Respondent in this regard needs to be rejected.
ii. Consequences
10. Having stated the above, the Single Judge turned his attention to the question of the
consequences of such unjustified breach of contract committed by the Respondent.
Page 5
REF FPSD-7871
11. In this regard, the Single Judge determined that, In application of the legal principle, pacta
sunt servanda, the Claimant is entitled to receive outstanding remuneration from the
Respondent in the amount of USD 17,500.
12. In addition, taking into consideration the Claimant’s request as well as the constant
practice of the Chamber in this regard, the Single Judge decided to award the Claimant
interest at the rate of 5% p.a. on the outstanding amounts as from the respective due
dates until the date of effective payment, as follows:
-
On the amount of USD 2,500, as from 1 December 2021 until the date of effective
payment;
On the amount of USD 2,500, as from 1 January 2022 until the date of effective
payment;
On the amount of USD 2,500, as from 1 February 2022 until the date of effective
payment;
On the amount of USD 2,500, as from 1 March 2022 until the date of effective
payment;
On the amount of USD 2,500, as from 1 April 2022 until the date of effective
payment;
On the amount of USD 2,500, as from 1 May 2022 until the date of effective
payment;
On the amount of USD 2,500, as from 1 June 2022 until the date of effective
payment.
iii. Compliance with monetary decisions
13. Finally, taking into account the applicable Regulations, the Single Judge 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.
14. In this regard, the Single Judge 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.
15. Therefore, bearing in mind the above, the Single Judge 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
Page 6
REF FPSD-7871
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.
16. 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.
17. The Single Judge 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
18. The Single Judge 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 Single Judge decided that no procedural costs
were to be imposed on the parties.
19. Likewise and for the sake of completeness, the Single Judge recalled the contents of art.
25 par. 8 of the Procedural Rules and decided that no procedural compensation shall be
awarded in these proceedings.
20. Lastly, the Single Judge concluded its deliberations by rejecting any other requests for
relief made by any of the parties.
Page 7
REF FPSD-7871
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Lamjed Ameur, is accepted.
2.
The Respondent, Al Helal Sporting, has to pay to the Claimant, the following amount:
-
USD 17,500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as follows:
-
On the amount of USD 2,500, as from 1 December 2021 until the date of effective
payment;
-
On the amount of USD 2,500, as from 1 January 2022 until the date of effective
payment;
-
On the amount of USD 2,500, as from 1 February 2022 until the date of effective
payment;
-
On the amount of USD 2,500, as from 1 March 2022 until the date of effective
payment;
-
On the amount of USD 2,500, as from 1 April 2022 until the date of effective
payment;
-
On the amount of USD 2,500, as from 1 May 2022 until the date of effective
payment;
-
On the amount of USD 2,500, as from 1 June 2022 until the date of effective
payment.
3.
Full payment (including all applicable interest) shall be made to the bank account
indicated in the enclosed Bank Account Registration Form.
4.
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.
Page 8
REF FPSD-7871
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.
5.
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.
6.
This decision is rendered without costs.
For the Football Tribunal:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
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).
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
Page 9