Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF. FPSD-15134
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 8 October 2024
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the
player Luiz Felipe Araujo Da Silva
COMPOSITION:
Frans DE WEGER (The Netherlands), Chairperson
Peter LUKASEK (Slovakia), Member
Oleg ZADUBROVSKIY (Russia), Member
CLAIMANT:
Luiz Felipe Araujo Da Silva, Brasil
Represented by André Scalli
RESPONDENT:
City, United Arab Emirates
pg. 2
REF. FPSD-15134
I. Facts of the case
1.
According to the information provided by the United Arab Emirates Football Association
(UAEFA), on 1 September 2022 the Brazilian player Luis Felipe Araujo Da Silva (hereinafter,
the Claimant or the Player) and the Emirati club City (hereinafter, the Respondent or the
Club) concluded an employment contract (hereinafter, the Contract), valid as from 1
September 2022 until 31 August 2024.
2.
Pursuant to Clause 3 of the Contract, the Club undertook to pay to the Player (hereinafter,
jointly referred to as the Parties) a monthly remuneration of AED 2,000, payable by the end
of each month.
3.
On 28 December 2022, the Parties concluded a Termination Agreement in accordance with
which:
“The two parties agreed on the following:
1. Termination of the contract by mutual consent signed between the two parties as of WE
28/12/2022 and then the player’s transfer to play in any other club.
2. The Player acknowledges that he does not have any financial or non-financial rights now and
in the future resulting from the termination of the contract and he has received all his
entitlements. He received 1500 dirhams salary per month + 1500 additional months upon
termination of the contract.
3. The player acknowledges that City FC Club is now and in the future absolved of any dues,
salaries, compensation, benefits or rights of any kind in relation to the aforementioned
employment contract”.
4.
On 20 February 2023, the Player and the Brazilian club Capital Futebol Clube - TO concluded
an employment contract valid as from the date of its signature until 21 May 2023. In
accordance with this new contract, the Player received the total amount of BRL 1,320.
pg. 3
REF. FPSD-15134
II. Proceedings before FIFA
5.
On 3 July 2024, the Claimant filed the claim at hand before FIFA. A summary of the Parties’
position is detailed below.
a. Position of the Claimant
6.
According to the Player, he played in official matches for the Club though it never provided
him with a Visa.
7.
The Player sustained that in December 2022 he was informed that he would no longer be
part of the Club, and that he was forced to sign the Termination Agreement. In the Player’s
view, the Termination Agreement has no legal basis or value, as the Player was forced to
sign it without knowing what he was signing.
8.
Furthermore, the Player argued that “the payment made was much less than what should
have been paid, because there were still 20 months left and only 1 month was paid”.
Consequently, the Player claimed being entitled to compensation for breach of contract in
the amount of USD 10,890.28 after mitigating the residual value of the Contract with the
salary per the new contract.
9.
Lastly, the Player also sustained that he was forced to pay for his flight tickets to return to
his country, and that he “has no knowledge of any foreign language”.
10. The Player requested the following relief:
i. To enforce FIFA’s jurisdiction as competent to rule on the matter;
ii. To rule that Dubai City Football Club shall pay to the Player compensation (plus 5% p.a.
applicable interest) of: (i) 10.890.28 USD for the unilateral early termination of the
employment contract without just cause and for failing to comply with his basic duties of
care, considerateness, good faith and provision of information;
iii. To impose a sanction on the Club pursuant to Article 12bis and 17 of the RSTP;
iv. In any event, to order the Club to cover all costs of the proceedings and to bear all the
legal fees and costs incurred by the Claimant in connection with the present matter.
b. Position of the Respondent
11. Despite being invited to do so, the Respondent failed to reply to the claim.
pg. 4
REF. FPSD-15134
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
12. First of all, the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter, the 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 3 July 2024 and submitted for decision on 8
October 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.
13. Furthermore, 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. 1 lit. b) of the
Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (October 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 a Brazilian player
and an Emirati club.
14. 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 2024 edition), and
considering that the present claim was lodged on 3 July 2024, the June 2024 edition of said
regulations (hereinafter, the Regulations) is applicable to the matter at hand as to the
substance.
b. Burden of proof
15. 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
16. Having established the competence and the applicable regulations, 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
assessing the matter at hand.
pg. 5
REF. FPSD-15134
i. Main legal discussion and considerations
17. The Chamber then moved to the substance of the matter, and took note of the fact that it
concerned the validity of the Termination Agreement concluded between the Parties on 28
December 2022, in accordance with which:
“The two parties agreed on the following:
1. Termination of the contract by mutual consent signed between the two parties as of WE
28/12/2022 and then the player’s transfer to play in any other club.
2. The Player acknowledges that he does not have any financial or non-financial rights now and
in the future resulting from the termination of the contract and he has received all his
entitlements. He received 1500 dirhams salary per month + 1500 additional months upon
termination of the contract.
3. The player acknowledges that City FC Club is now and in the future absolved of any dues,
salaries, compensation, benefits or rights of any kind in relation to the aforementioned
employment contract”.
18. In this context, the Chamber observed that, according to the Player, he was forced to sign
the abovementioned Termination Agreement without knowing what he was signing, and
that consequently it has no legal basis or value. In this respect, the Player argued that the
Club terminated the Contract without just cause. Therefore, he claimed being entitled to
compensation for breach of contract without just cause in the amount of USD 10,890.28,
after mitigating the residual value of the Contract with the salary agreed in the new
employment contract concluded with Capital Futebol Clube - TO.
19. The Chamber also observed that the claim remained uncontested by the Respondent.
20. In view of the foregoing, the Chamber acknowledged that its task was to assess whether
the Termination Agreement could be considered null and void and if, as alleged by the
Claimant, the Club terminated the Contract without just cause.
21. In doing so, the Chamber initially referred to art. 13 par. 5 of the Procedural Rules, and
concluded that the Player bore the burden of proving his allegations that the Respondent
unilaterally terminated the Contract and that he was forced to sign the Termination
Agreement.
22. Along these lines, the Chamber also considered it appropriate to recall the Parties the
longstanding and well-established jurisprudence of the Football Tribunal, in accordance
with which a party signing a document of legal relevance without knowledge of its precise
contents, does so on its own responsibility.
pg. 6
REF. FPSD-15134
23. With the above in mind, the Chamber turned its attention to the allegations of the Claimant,
and observed that they were not backed by any documentary evidence. In particular, the
Chamber noted that there was no evidence as to the alleged communication from the
Respondent informing the Player that he would no longer be part of the team. Equally, the
Chamber pointed out that the Claimant also failed to submit any evidence of the alleged
duress in the conclusion of the Termination Agreement.
24. Consequently, and referring to art. 13 par. 5 of the Procedural Rules, the Chamber
determined that the Player did not meet his burden of proof in establishing the alleged
grounds for invalidating the Termination Agreement, and thus decided to set aside the
Player’s allegations in this regard.
25. Based on the above, the Chamber, by majority and on the basis of the specific facts and
circumstances of the case at hand, determined that the Termination Agreement is a valid
and binding contract concluded between the Parties. Consequently, the majority of the
Chamber concluded that the Player is not entitled to compensation for breach of contract,
as no breach of contract has been proven.
26. In view of the foregoing considerations, the Chamber, by majority, decided that the claim
of the Player shall be rejected.
27. For the sake of completeness, the majority of the Chamber wished to point out that, in the
Termination Agreement, the Player clearly acknowledged having received all his
entitlements, which was further confirmed in his claim, where at no point did he request
the payment of any outstanding remuneration. As a result, the Chamber, by majority,
concluded that it was not in a position to award the Claimant any outstanding salaries.
d. Costs
28. 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.
29. 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.
30. Lastly, the DRC concluded its deliberations by rejecting any other requests for relief made
by any of the parties.
pg. 7
REF. FPSD-15134
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Luiz Felipe Araujo Da Silva, is rejected.
2.
This decision is rendered without costs.
For the Football Tribunal:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
pg. 8
REF. FPSD-15134
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 – Legal & Compliance Division
396 Alhambra Circle, 6th floor, Coral Gables, Miami, Florida, USA 33134
legal.fifa.com | [email protected] | T: +41 (0)43 222 7777
pg. 9