DRC Overdue Payables
Texto da decisão
REF. FPSD-19209
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 16 June 2025
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning
the player Stefan Ashkovski
BY:
Andre DOS SANTOS MEGALE, Brazil
CLAIMANT:
Stefan Ashkovski, Bulgaria and North Macedonia
Represented by Toni Jocvchevski
RESPONDENT:
Kizilkaya Tarim Sanliurfaspor, Türkiye
Represented by Ercan Sevdimbaş
pg. 2
REF. FPSD-19209
I. Facts of the case
1.
On 27 June 2024, the Bulgarian and North Macedonian player, Stefan Ashkovski
(hereinafter: the Player or the Claimant), and the Turkish club, Kizilkaya Tarim Sanliurfaspor
(hereinafter: the Club or the Respondent), concluded a document entitled “Additional
Protocol” (hereinafter: the Protocol), by means of which they determined the additional
conditions for the “Professional Player Agreement” that would be signed between the
parties.
2.
The Protocol established, inter alia, the following (quoted verbatim):
“I) Obligation of the Club
FOR 2024/2025 FOOTBALL SEASON
Contract offer for the season from 2024 until May 31.2025 + 1 year Option
Total transfer fee 100.000 Euros
The football player will be paid a salary of 10,000 Euros for a total of 10 months between
August and May.
Special payments:
a) Bonus 15.000.- € for 10 Goals or (5 goals + 5 assist)
d) Bonus 15.000.-€ for Play-Offs (place/ranking 3-8)
c) Bonus 30.000.-€ for promote to süperlig (place/ranking 1-2)
(…)
Also the Club pays 10,000.- € Commission in two installments (5.000-€ by signing and
5.000,- € whith the second salary of the players in August) for the season 2024-25 the
club pay 15.000,- € for the season 2025-26.
In the event that the club defaults on salary payments by more than 30 days, 2.500,- €
will be paid by the Club in additionall to the salary.
(…)
-All payments under this contract are net payments and will not be reduced by any tax
or other amounts. For the sake of clarity, the club will be always obliged to pay stoppage
tax and the player shall always receive net the indicated amounts. For the avoidance of
pg. 3
REF. FPSD-19209
the doubt, the Club shall only be responsible of the stoppage tax, social contributions
and other levies accured in accordance with the Turkish Tax legislation and the Club shall
not be responsible for any other obligations due to the - including but not limited additional tax duties, social contributions and/or levies related to the other countries
legislations.
(…)”
3.
On an unspecified date, the parties signed a document entitled “Professional Football
Player Contract” (hereinafter: the Contract), valid as from 28 July 2024 until 30 June 2025.
4.
On 29 January 2025, the parties concluded a document entitled “Termination and
Settlement Agreement” (hereinafter: the Termination Agreement). Clause 1.1 of the
Termination Agreement set forth:
“1.1 The parties hereby immediately terminate by mutual agreement all relationships
and disputes which may exist between them up to the date hereof for whatever concept
which may arose out of the early termination of the Professional Football Player Contract
with the starting date of 28.07.2024 and ending date of 30.06.2025, and its additional
protocol.”
5.
Clauses 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4 of the Termination Agreement stipulated (quoted verbatim):
“1.2 The parties have agreed that the Club have to pay 30.000, -EUR (thirty thousand
euros) net to the Player with the 3 installments regarding the receivables which the Player
has from the Club, which arising/are due from the Professional Football Player Contract
with the starting date of 28.07.2024 and ending date of 30.06.2025, and its additional
protocol. The parties have agreed that the net amount of 30.000,00-EUR, as specified in
this Mutual Termination and Settlement Agreement, will be paid by the Club as follows:
• Net 10.000, -EUR will be paid on 15.02.2025 at the latest;
• Net 10.000, -EUR will pay on 15.03.2025 at the latest and
• Net 10.000, -EUR will pay on 15.04.2025 at the latest.”
“1.3 For avoidance of any doubt, in the event that the Footballer has a tax liability arising
from this Mutual Termination Agreement, the Club is responsible to pay all relevant
taxes, state contributions and surcharges, on top of the above mentioned net amounts,
and to provide the Player with the corresponding tax certificates concerning the payment
of all the above specified net amounts alongside all relevant taxes, state contributions
and surcharges, on top of the above mentioned net amounts.”
“1.4 In this context; After the payment of the agreed termination sum in amount of
30.000,00-EUR NET by the club towards the Player in the determined time frame in point
1.2. above, the Player accepts and undertakes to release the Club irrevocably for all the
pg. 4
REF. FPSD-19209
obligations set in the Contract and also the other agreements, arrangements and
understandings made by and between the parties regarding the same period and for
any other claims / compensation related to employment contract(s) and their annexes.
The Parties accept, declare and undertake that they have no rights and receivables from
each other, except the obligations determined in point 1.2. in this agreement which the
club have towards the Player. The Club also hereby explicitly and irrevocably releases the
Player from any and all obligations arising from the employment contract between the
Parties, and its annexes.”
6.
On 2 May 2025, the Player put the Club in default and requested payment of EUR 30,000
net by no later than 12 May 2025.
II. Proceedings before FIFA
7.
On 13 May 2025, the Claimant filed the claim at hand before FIFA. A summary of the parties’
respective positions is detailed below.
a. Position of the Claimant
8.
The Player argued that the parties concluded the Protocol, by means of which the Club
undertook to pay him EUR 100,000 net for the 2024/2025 football season in 10 instalments
between August 2024 and May 2025. Then, the Player mentioned that, on 29 January 2025,
the parties concluded the Termination Agreement, which was the subject of this claim, by
means of which they mutually terminated all relationships and disputes between them.
9.
Specifically, the Player stated that, in the Termination Agreement, the Club undertook to
pay him EUR 30,000 net in three instalments, which were due on 15 February 2025, 15
March 2025 and 15 April 2025. Nonetheless, the Player argued that the Club failed to make
these payments and, therefore, owes him EUR 30,000 net.
10. Furthermore, the Player alleged that he sent a notice of default on 2 May 2025, but the
Club failed to respond.
11. The Claimant’s requests for relief were the following:
“FIFA DRC to order to the Respondent Club SANLIURFASPOR unconditionally to pay to
him the outstanding debt (overdue payables) on the basis of the agreed termination
sum in the point 1.2 of the “Termination and Settlement Agreement” abovementioned in the total NET amount of 30.000 (thirty thousand) euro net, all along
with the pertinent default interests of 5% p.a. on the outstanding debt calculated as
follows:
As of 16.02.2025 until the day of effective payment on the amount of 10.000 (ten
pg. 5
REF. FPSD-19209
thousand) euro,
As of 16.03.2025 until the day of effective payment on the amount of 10.000 (ten
thousand) euro and
As of 16.04.2025 until the day of effective payment on the amount of 10.000 (ten
thousand) euro,
on the Player’s bank account given in the Bank account registration form in enclose
to the claim, exhibit 6, as well as the Club to pay all relevant taxes, state contributions
and surcharges on top of the above mentioned net amounts, and to provide the
Player with the corresponding tax certificates concerning the payment of all the above
specified net amounts alongside all relevant taxes, state contributions and
surcharges, on top of the above mentioned net amounts.
In addition, the Club (Respondent) to be sanctioned in accordance with art. 12bis
para. 4 of the FIFA RSTP and FIFA Circular Letter no. 1628 dated 9 May 2018
appropriate to the due amount.”
b. Position of the Respondent
12. In its reply, the Club argued that it had fully and duly complied with all its contractual
obligations towards the Player. However, the Club stated that, due to a change in the Club’s
management, some documents from the previous administrative period were currently
inaccessible. In this regard, the Club mentioned that it would provide the relevant receipts
as soon as they were retrieved.
13. Additionally, the Club alleged that the interest requested by the Player – 5% p.a. as from
the day following each due date - was unacceptable, as he only communicated his demands
on 2 May 2025.
14. The Respondent’s requests for relief were the following:
“With reserving our rights to submit any further evidence, in view of the foregoing, we
respectfully request:
That all claims of the Claimant be dismissed in their entirety;
In the event that the Tribunal reaches a contrary conclusion, that we respectfully request
that the claim be dismissed at least in respect of the interest commencement dates.”
pg. 6
REF. FPSD-19209
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
15. 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 13 May 2025 and submitted for
decision on 17 June 2025. Taking into account the wording of arts. 31 and 34 of the January
2025 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.
16. Furthermore, 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 par. 1 lit. b) of the
Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (hereinafter: the Regulations) (January
2025 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 Bulgarian and North Macedonian player and a Turkish club.
17. 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. 29 of
the Regulations, the January 2025 edition of the Regulations is applicable to the matter at
hand as to the substance.
b. Burden of proof
18. 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).
c. Merits of the dispute
19. Having established the competence and the applicable regulations, 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
he considered pertinent for assessing the matter at hand.
pg. 7
REF. FPSD-19209
i. Main legal discussion and considerations
20. The Single Judge then moved to the substance of the matter, noting that it concerned a
claim of a player against a club for outstanding remuneration.
21. The Single Judge recalled that, according to the Player, the Club failed to pay him the full
amount established in the Termination Agreement.
22. Additionally, the Single Judge noted that, conversely, the Club argued that it had fulfilled its
obligations but was unable to retrieve the payment receipts due to administrative changes
in its management. Nonetheless, the Club also stated that the starting date for the
application of interest, as requested by the Player, could not be upheld.
23. In this context, the Single Judge acknowledged that his task was to determine whether the
Player is entitled to the amounts claimed.
24. At this point, the Single Judge remarked that the Club bore the burden of proving that it
indeed complied with the financial terms of the Termination Agreement and/or that it had
a valid reason for not doing so. However, the Single Judge underscored that the Club merely
stated that it had complied with the payments but failed to provide any evidence to support
this allegation.
25. Furthermore, the Single Judge highlighted that the Club even failed to provide evidence
regarding the alleged reason for its inability to produce the receipts.
26. Based on the above, the Single Judge considered that the Club failed to prove that it fulfilled
its financial obligations and, therefore, he decided to award the Player EUR 30,000 net.
27. Regarding interest, the Single Judge noted that the Player requested that it be applied
starting from the day following each due date, while the Club argued that payment was
only demanded on 2 May 2025 and, therefore, his request cannot be upheld.
28. In this respect, the Single Judge observed that the Termination Agreement was silent
regarding the starting date for interest in case of non-payment. Therefore, based on the
standard practice of the Football Tribunal, the Single Judge decided that interest be applied
as from the day following each due date until the day of effective payment, as requested
by the Player.
29. Lastly, the Single Judge also noted that the Player requested that the Club be condemned
“to pay all relevant taxes, state contributions and surcharges on top of the above mentioned net
amounts, and to provide the Player with the corresponding tax certificates concerning the
payment of all the above specified net amounts alongside all relevant taxes, state contributions
and surcharges, on top of the above mentioned net amounts”. At this point, the Single Judge
recalled that this request is based on clause 1.3 of the Termination Agreement.
pg. 8
REF. FPSD-19209
Nonetheless, the Single Judge observed that this clause established that the Club was
obliged to this “in the event that the Footballer has a tax liability arising from this Mutual
Termination Agreement”.
30. Based on the above, the Single Judge considered that, in this case, it was the Player’s
burden to prove and explain that he had a tax liability arising from this Termination
Agreement and that, therefore, the Club was obliged to pay taxes and provide him with the
relevant tax certificates. In the absence of any evidence or explanation in this regard, the
Single Judge concluded that he was not in a position to order the Club to pay taxes and
provide the Player with the corresponding certificates, but only to order payment of the
net amounts, as stipulated in clause 1.2.
ii. Art. 12bis of the Regulations
31. The Single Judge then referred to art.12bis par. 2 of the Regulations, which stipulates that
any club found to have delayed a due payment for more than 30 days without a prima facie
contractual basis may be sanctioned, in accordance with art. 12bis par. 4 of the Regulations.
32. To this end, the Single Judge confirmed that the Claimant put the Respondent in default of
payment of the amounts sought, which had fallen due for more than 30 days, and granted
the Respondent with at least 10 days to cure such breach of contract.
33. Accordingly, the Single Judge also confirmed that the Respondent had delayed a due
payment without a prima facie contractual basis. It followed that the criteria enshrined in
art. 12bis of the Regulations were met in the case at hand.
34. The Single Judge further established that, by virtue of art. 12bis par. 4 of the Regulations,
the Single Judge has competence to impose sanctions on the Club. On account of the above
and bearing in mind that the Club had previous sanctions, the Single Judge decided to
impose a fine of USD 5,000 on the Respondent in accordance with art. 12bis par. 4 lit. c) of
the Regulations.
35. The Single Judge also highlighted that a repeated offence will be considered as an
aggravating circumstance and lead to more severe penalty, in accordance with art. 12bis
par. 6 of the Regulations.
iii. Compliance with monetary decisions
36. 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.
pg. 9
REF. FPSD-19209
37. 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.
38. 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 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.
39. 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.
40. 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
41. 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.
42. 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.
43. Lastly, the Single Judge concluded his deliberations by rejecting any other requests for
relief made by any of the parties.
pg. 10
REF. FPSD-19209
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Stefan Ashkovski, is partially accepted.
2.
The Respondent, Kizilkaya Tarim Sanliurfaspor, must pay to the Claimant the following
amount:
- EUR 30,000 net as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as follows:
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of EUR 10,000 net as from 16 February 2025 until the
date of effective payment;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of EUR 10,000 net as from 16 March 2025 until the
date of effective payment;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of EUR 10,000 net as from 16 April 2025 until the date
of effective payment.
3.
Any further claims of the Claimant are rejected.
4.
A fine in the amount of USD 5,000 is imposed on the Respondent, which must be paid to
FIFA within 30 days of notification of this decision. Such fine must be paid to the
following bank account with a clear reference to the case FPSD-19209:
UBS Zurich
Account number 230-366677.61N (FIFA Players’ Status)
Clearing number 230
IBAN: CH12 0023 0230 3666 7761 N
SWIFT: UBSWCHZH80A
5.
Full payment (including all applicable interest) shall be made to the bank account indicated
in the enclosed Bank Account Registration Form.
6.
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.
pg. 11
REF. FPSD-19209
7.
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.
8.
This decision is rendered without costs.
For the Football Tribunal:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
pg. 12
REF. FPSD-19209
NOTE RELATED TO THE APPEAL PROCEDURE:
According to art. 50 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., art. 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. 13