Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF. FPSD-18981
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 20 June 2025
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning
the player Gustavo Canizales Valdelamar
COMPOSITION:
Frans DE WEGER (The Netherlands), Chairperson
Andre DOS SANTOS MEGALE (Brazil), Member
Stefano SARTORI (Italy), Member
CLAIMANT:
Gustavo Canizales Valdelamar, Colombia
Represented by Cesar Grande Garcia
RESPONDENT:
Club Sport Sebaco, Nicaragua
pg. 2
REF. FPSD-18981
I. Facts of the case
1.
On 6 January 2025, the Colombian player, Gustavo Cañizales Valdelamar (hereinafter: the
Player or the Claimant), and the Nicaraguan club, Club Sport Sebaco (hereinafter: the Club
or the Respondent) entered into an employment contract (hereinafter: the Contract) valid for
the duration of the Club’s participation in the “Torneo Clausura 2024-2025” (hereinafter:
Torneo Clausura).
2.
Clause 5 of the Contract established the Player’s remuneration as follows:
“CLAUSULA QUINTA: Remuneración:
Se establece una remuneración salarial ÚNICA de C$43,800.00 (Cuarenta y tres mil
ochocientos córdobas netos) equivalente a $1,200 dólares americanos, pagaderos en los
primeros 7 días de cada mes empezando desde el mes Febrero del año 2025, que incluye
que:
а) No se establece ningún tipo de remuneración o bono por ninguna actividad sujeta a
sus responsabilidades.
b) No se establece ningún tipo de remuneración en lo concerniente a su movilización,
hacia Nicaragua o fuera de ella (de ser extranjero).
c. No se establece acuerdo en lo concerniente a su vivienda, apartamento y/o habitación
para que EL CONTRATADO resida.
d. La pretemporada se pagará con el 50% del salario mensual del jugador.
e. No se establece ninguna otra remuneración que pudiere haber quedado excluida de
estos incisos”
Freely translated into English:
"CLAUSE FIVE: Remuneration:
A SINGLE salary remuneration of C$43,800.00 (forty-three thousand eight hundred
cordobas net) equivalent to $1,200 US dollars is established, payable within the first
7 days of each month starting from February 2025. This includes:
а) No remuneration or bonus of any kind is established for any activity subject to his
responsibilities.
b) No remuneration of any kind is established for his transportation to or from
Nicaragua (if he is a foreigner).
pg. 3
REF. FPSD-18981
c. No agreement is established regarding housing, apartment, and/or room for THE
CONTRACTED PARTY to reside.
d. The pre-season will be paid with 50% of the player's monthly salary.
e. No other remuneration that may have been excluded from these clauses is
established.”
3.
Clauses 8 and 9 stipulated:
“CLAUSULA OCTAVA: Rescisión. EL CLUB se reserva el derecho de rescindir el presente
contrato en caso de INOPERANCIA o INOBSERVANCIA de cualquiera de las cláusulas
condiciones del presente contrato, y por causas de indisciplina y/o deficiencia durante
desarrollo de una temporada o bien en sus relaciones con otros jugadores, Directiva
integrantes de EL CLUB, público en general, comunicadores y cualquier otra persona
relacionada con el fútbol.
Hacemos mención que el contrato termina o la relación deportiva termina con el club
que lo contrató, el día que se juega el último partido del torneo clausura 2024-2025.“
“CLAUSULA NOVENA Indemnización por la rescisión de contrato con anticipación
EL CLUB fijará un monto para la liberación de su ficha hacia otro club (Nacional o
Extranjero) siempre y cuando el contrato con EL CLUB se encuentre en vigor. El valor de
la liberación de su ficha para traspaso se medirá según una evaluación proporcionada
por la Dirección Deportiva de EL CLUB en relación a los gastos suscitados en la
manutención de su persona durante su permanencia con EL CLUB.”
Freely translated into English:
"CLAUSE EIGHT: Termination. THE CLUB reserves the right to terminate this contract in
the event of INACTION or NON-COMPLIANCE with any of the clauses or conditions of this
contract, and for reasons of indiscipline and/or deficiency during the course of a season
or in his relations with other players, members of THE CLUB's management, the general
public, the media and any other person related to football. We hereby state that the
contract shall terminate or the sporting relationship with the engaging club shall end on
the day the last match of the 2024-2025 Clausura tournament is played.”
“CLAUSE NINE Compensation for early termination of contract THE CLUB shall set an
amount for the release of the player to another club (domestic or foreign) as long as the
contract with THE CLUB is in force. The value of the release of his registration for transfer
shall be measured according to an assessment provided by the Sports Management of
pg. 4
REF. FPSD-18981
THE CLUB in relation to the expenses incurred in his maintenance during his stay with
THE CLUB."
4.
On 18 January 2025, the Club played a match against Nicaraguan club Walter Ferretti.
5.
On 7 February 2025, the Player sent a letter to the Club, stating that he had received several
comments from the coaching staff indicating that the Club was not interested in
maintaining the contractual relationship with him. In this regard, the Player argued that he
remained committed to fulfilling his obligations under the Contract. The Player further
contended that by accepting the Club’s offer, he rejected other employment opportunities,
and, therefore, requested that the Club confirm whether it remained committed to the
Contract within the following 48 hours.
6.
On 10 February 2025, the Player sent a new letter to the Club, stating that he had not
received any response from the Club to his previous letter. In this respect, the Player
argued that, if no response was received within 48 hours, the case would be submitted to
the Football Tribunal.
7.
On 28 February 2025, the Player sent a new correspondence, stating that the Club’s failure
to respond to his previous correspondence was interpreted as a renunciation of his
services. The Player alleged that the Club was breaching the Contract and, therefore, he
had just cause to terminate the Contract. The Claimant argued that a claim would be filed
before the Football Tribunal.
8.
The Player confirmed that he remained unemployed after the termination.
II. Proceedings before FIFA
9.
On 22 April 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
10. The Player argued that, on 6 January 2025, the parties concluded the Contract, which was
valid for the second half of the football season in Nicaragua, i.e., from 19 January 2025 until
25 May 2025. According to the Player, he was entitled to a monthly salary of USD 1,200 to
be paid within the first 7 days of each month, starting in February 2025, as well as lodging
and meals.
11. The Player then contended that, after signing the Contract, he was never again officially
contacted by the Club’s board of directors, who had signed the Contract. The Claimant
mentioned that instead, as he was preparing his journey to Nicaragua in early January 2025
to join the team and prepare for the first football match scheduled on 19 January 2025, he
pg. 5
REF. FPSD-18981
was contacted by the coaching staff and a player, who informed him that his services would
no longer be needed for the Torneo Clausura, as the Club had signed too many foreign
players at once.
12. Based on the above, the Player mentioned that although he was about to travel to
Nicaragua, he decided to delay purchasing his flight ticket until receiving confirmation that
the Club would adhere to and comply with the terms of the Contract. In this respect, the
Player alleged that despite multiple requests, he did not receive this confirmation.
13. The Player also argued that he sought legal assistance and sent three letters, the last of
which, dated 28 February 2025, terminated the Contract with just cause.
14. According to the Player, he was dismissed before the first match of the season through a
communication from the coaching staff and never received a response from the Club’s
board of directors. In this context, the Player argued that he was prevented from
commencing his duties with the Club.
15. Considering that he terminated the Contract on 28 February 2025, the Player argued that
the first payment had already fallen due, and he is entitled to USD 1,200 as outstanding
remuneration. Additionally, the Player asserted that he is entitled to USD 6,000 as
compensation.
16. The Claimant’s requests for relief were the following:
“I. Requests for relief
1. The Respondent shall be ordered to pay the Claimant USD 1,200 (one thousand
two hundred US dollars) as outstanding salaries, plus 5% interest per annum, from 9
February 2025 until the date of effective payment.
2. The Respondent shall be ordered to pay the Claimant USD 6,000 (six thousand US
dollars) as compensation for the breach of employment contract, plus 5% interest per
annum from 1 March 2025 until the date of effective payment.”
b. Position of the Respondent
17. The Club acknowledged that the parties had concluded the Contract but stated that the
Player failed to travel to Nicaragua to join the Club and fulfil his contractual obligations.
18. The Club also argued that only the Club’s board of directors has the authority to make
decisions regarding player recruitment and not the coaching staff or a player. The Club
alleged that there was no official communication indicating that the Club was no longer
interested in hiring the Player’s services.
pg. 6
REF. FPSD-18981
19. In this respect, the Club denied having breached the Contract and argued that the failure
to comply with it was due to the Player’s refusal to fulfil his duties as stipulated.
20. The Club mentioned that after the Player’s refusal to travel to Nicaragua, the Club had no
further communications with him or his representatives. Additionally, the Club highlighted
that the Contract did not specify that the Club was obliged to cover the Player’s flight from
Colombia to Nicaragua and emphasised that in these cases it is the Player who assumes
the costs.
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
21. 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 22 April 2025 and submitted for decision on
20 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.
22. 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 (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 Colombian player and a Nicaraguan club.
23. 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. 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
24. 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).
pg. 7
REF. FPSD-18981
c. Merits of the dispute
25. 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.
i. Main legal discussion and considerations
26. The Chamber then moved to the substance of the matter, noting that it concerned a claim
of a player against a club for outstanding remuneration and compensation for breach of
contract.
27. The Chamber recalled that, according to the Player, the parties signed the Contract, but the
Club later informed him, through its coaching staff, that his services were no longer
needed. Therefore, the Player argued that before travelling to Nicaragua, he requested
confirmation from the Club that it remained willing to comply with the terms of the
Contract. He stated that, after receiving no such confirmation, he terminated the Contract
with just cause.
28. The Chamber noted that, conversely, the Club contended that it did not breach the
Contract, and that the non-enforcement of the Contract resulted from the Player’s failure
to travel to Nicaragua and join the Club.
29. In this context, the Chamber acknowledged that its task was to determine whether the
Player terminated the Contract with just cause and its consequences.
A. Did the Player have just cause to terminate the Contract?
30. The Chamber first noted that it is undisputed that the parties concluded the Contract.
Additionally, although the Contract did not clearly establish the dates of its duration, the
Chamber observed that (i) the Player provided evidence demonstrating that the Club’s first
match took place on 18 January 2025, (ii) the Player provided evidence demonstrating that
the season ended on 25 May 2025 and (iii) the Club did not dispute the dates provided by
the Player.
31. Thus, the Chamber concluded that on 6 January 2025 the parties indeed entered into an
employment relationship, which was supposed to be valid until 25 May 2025, with the first
match taking place on 18 January 2025.
32. Having this in mind, the Chamber then noted that the Player argued that, a few days after
signing the Contract, and before the first match of the Torneo Clausura, i.e., at the
pg. 8
REF. FPSD-18981
beginning of January 2025, he was informed by the Club’s coaching staff and a player that
his services were no longer needed. In this respect, the Chamber wished to mention that
the Player failed to provide any evidence to substantiate this alleged communication.
Additionally, the Chamber remarked that he acknowledged that this communication did
not come from the Club’s board of directors or from the person who signed the Contract,
but from alleged Club’s employees.
33. Therefore, in the Chamber’s opinion, it could not be determined that the Player indeed
received this communication, and, in any event, it would not have been binding for the
Club.
34. Furthermore, the Chamber observed that, based on the above allegations, the Player
acknowledged that he decided to delay purchasing the flight ticket until receiving
confirmation that the Club would adhere to and comply with the terms of the Contract. In
this sense, the Chamber highlighted that the Player clearly acknowledged that it was his
obligation to purchase the ticket to travel to Nicaragua and decided not to do so. At this
point, the Chamber also referred to clause 5.b of the Contract, which established that “b)
No remuneration of any kind is established for his transportation to or from Nicaragua (if he is
a foreigner).”.
35. Thus, the Chamber found it clear that the parties contractually agreed, as it was
acknowledged by the Player, that he would bear the cost of his transportation to Nicaragua,
i.e., that he was responsible for buying the flight tickets and joining the Club, and the Club
was not obliged to provide him with the tickets or a lump sum to purchase them.
36. Additionally, the Chamber noted that, according to the Player, he attempted to contact the
Club’s board of directors multiple times but failed to receive a confirmation that the Club
was going to comply with the terms of the Contract. However, the Chamber underlined
that the Player failed to provide any evidence of these communications: the first evidence
of communication is a letter dated 7 February 2025, whereas this alleged situation occurred
during the first days of January and before 18 January 2025.
37. Moreover, the Chamber saw that the Player provided two notices of default dated 7 and
10 February 2025, each granting 48 hours to the Club to confirm whether it was willing to
comply with the terms of the Contract. Additionally, on 28 February 2024, more than 20
days after the first notice and in the absence of any reply, he terminated the Contract citing
just cause.
38. After the analysis of all the allegations and evidence on file, the Chamber concluded that:
(i) the parties had a valid and binding Contract, and the Player was supposed to join the
Club for the first match of the Torneo Clausura, which was held on 18 January 2025;
pg. 9
REF. FPSD-18981
(ii) it was the Player’s responsibility to travel to Nicaragua to fulfil the Contract and he
acknowledged that he did not comply with this obligation;
(iii) according to the Player, he did not travel to Nicaragua based on the alleged
communication he received from the coaching staff and a player. However, this was not
proven;
(iv) the Player did not provide any evidence of further communications with the Club until
7 February 2025;
(v) the Club also failed to send any communication to the Player requesting him to join the
Club;
(vi) based on the evidence provided by the Player, between 18 January 2025 and 6 February
2025, the Club played five matches and there is no proof that either party communicated
to request fulfilment of the Contract;
(vii) the Player only contacted the Club more than three weeks after he should have joined,
considering that the first match was on 18 January 2025;
(viii) the Club failed to reply to the Player’s communication and did not confirm whether it
was willing to comply with the terms of the Contract, nor did it argue that he failed to
honour the Contract.
39. At this point, the Chamber recalled that art. 14 of the Regulations establishes:
“1. A contract may be terminated by either party without consequences of any kind
(either payment of compensation or imposition of sporting sanctions) where there is just
cause. In general, just cause shall exist in any circumstance in which a party can no
longer reasonably and in good faith be expected to continue a contractual relationship.
2. Any abusive conduct of a party aiming at forcing the counterparty to terminate or
change the terms of the contract shall entitle the counterparty (a player or a club) to
terminate the contract with just cause.”
40. While the Chamber acknowledged that the Player put the Club in default twice and,
although he granted two 48-hours deadline, he terminated the Contract more than 20 days
after sending his first notice, the Chamber also considered that there are no sufficient
elements to establish that the Club engaged in abusive behaviour toward the Player or that
it prevented him from performing his duties.
41. Considering that the parties had signed the Contract, the Chamber found that it was the
Player’s responsibility to join the Club in Nicaragua, and he failed to do so for some alleged
reasons that were not proven. The Club, for its part, did not request that he join the Club,
pg. 10
REF. FPSD-18981
nor did it respond to the Player’s notices. However, the Chamber deemed that this is not
sufficient to consider that there was an abusive behaviour, especially when the Player
himself acknowledged that he decided not to travel despite having a signed contract.
42. Based on the above, in the Chamber’s opinion, both parties contributed to the termination
of the Contract or to its non-enforcement. In this regard, the Chamber decided that the
Player did not have just cause to terminate the Contract.
B. Consequences
43. Having established that the Player did not have just cause to terminate the Contract, the
Chamber then determined that he is not entitled to compensation. Hence, the Chamber
decided to reject the Player’s claim in this regard.
44. Regarding the outstanding remuneration, the Chamber recalled that the Player did not
even travel to the Club’s country, i.e., he did not provide any services to the Club. Thus, the
Chamber also decided to reject the Player’s claim regarding outstanding remuneration, as
the Contract was never enforced.
45. In light of all the above, the Chamber rejected the Player’s claim in its entirety.
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.
48. Lastly, the DRC concluded its deliberations by rejecting any other requests for relief made
by any of the parties.
pg. 11
REF. FPSD-18981
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Gustavo Canizales Valdelamar, is rejected.
2.
This decision is rendered without costs.
For the Football Tribunal:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
pg. 12
REF. FPSD-18981
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