Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF FPSD-3576
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 24 November 2021
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the player Ouatarra
Soualia Dabila
BY:
PERLEMUTER Jerome (France)
CLAIMANT:
Ouatarra Soualia Dabila, Côte d'Ivoire
Represented by Felix Majani
RESPONDENT:
Alfayha FC, Saudi Arabia
Represented by Ali Abbes & Mohamed Rokbani
Page 2
REF FPSD-3576
I.
Facts of the case
1.
On or about 1st October 2020, the Ivorian player Ouatarra Soualia Dabila (hereinafter: the
Claimant) and the Saudi club Alfayha FC (hereinafter: the Respondent) concluded an
employment contract (hereinafter: the Contract) under which the Respondent agreed to
employ the Claimant as from 1 October 2020 until 31 July 2021.
2.
Clause 4 of the Contract reads inter alia as follows:
“Benefits: (30,000$) as bonus in event the team promote to premier league, (10,000$) as
bonus in the event of the player participating in 70% of the official matches of the league for
the season of 20\21 (…),”
3.
On 16 June 2021, the Claimant sent a notice to the Respondent requesting the salary of May
2021 and the amount of USD 40,000 as outstanding bonuses; granting a deadline of 15 days
to comply to no avail.
4.
On 25 August 2021, the Claimant sent a second notice to the Respondent requesting the
salaries of May, June and July 2021 and the amount of USD 40,000 as outstanding bonuses;
granting a deadline of 10 days to comply to no avail.
II. Proceedings before FIFA
5.
On 6 September 2021, 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
6.
According to the Claimant, he was paid match bonuses for every league match and at the
date of expiry of the Contract, the Respondent had not paid the Claimant bonuses for 4
matches totaling to 78,000 Riyals particularized as follows:
“Opponent- Al Drayiha FC: bonus due 16,000 Riyals
Opponent – Al Bukariya FC: bonus due 18,000 Riyals
Opponent – Hajeer FC: bonus due 21,000 Riyals
Opponent – Al Nahda FC: bonus due 23,000 Riyals”
7.
Moreover, the Claimant states he was entitled to USD 10,000 appearance fee as he had
participated in more than 70% of the matches.
8.
The Claimant further submits that as the Respondent was promoted at the end of the season,
the amount of USD 30,000 is due to him.
9.
The Claimant’s requests for relief are the following:
Page 3
REF FPSD-3576
“the Claimant requests the FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber to pronounce on the following
and to make such orders as it considers necessary and appropriate as follows, i.e. to:
Find Alfayha Football Club to be indebted to Mr. Ouatarra Soualio Dabila to the tune of USD
40,000 net;
Order Alfayha Football Club to pay Mr. Ouatarra Soualio Dabila USD 40,000 net;
Order Alfayha Football Club to pay Mr. Ouatarra Soualio Dabila 78,000 Riyals net in
outstanding match bonuses;
Award interest on (ii) and (iii) above at 5% p.a. with effect from 1st August 2021 until full
and final payment;
Find Alfayha Football Club to be in breach of Article 12 bis (1) of the FIFA Regulations on the
Status and Transfer of Players;
Fine and a ban Alfayha Football Club from registering any new players, either nationally or
internationally for one or two entire and consecutive registration periods;
Impose any other sanction it deems relevant on Alfayha Football Club in pursuit of the
objectives listed in Article 12 bis of the FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players;
Order Alfayha Football Club to bear costs of this suit;
Grant any further or other relief that this Honorable Chamber may deem fit.”
b. Position of the Respondent
10. According to the Respondent, The Respondent replied to the claim on the following terms.
11. The Respondent stated that “due to some financial difficult the club acknowledges that it did
not pay to the player:
USD 30,000 as a Bonus for promotion to the Saudi Professional league.
USD 10,000 as a Bonus for his participation to more than 70% of matches.”
12. Despite the above, the Respondent disputes the Claimant’s request for outstanding match
bonuses.
13. In particular, the Respondent states that the Claimant has not provided any evidence to
support that the parties agreed the said bonuses.
14. The Respondent filed the following request:
“we kindly ask the Honourable DRC to reject the claim of the claimant regarding the match
bonuses.”
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
Page 4
REF FPSD-3576
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
15. First of all, the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter also referred to as 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 06 September 2021 and submitted
for decision on 24 November 2021. Taking into account the wording of art. 34 of the October
2021 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. Subsequently, the Single Judge referred to art. 2 par. 1 and art. 24 par. 1 lit. a) 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 (August 2021 edition),
he is competent to deal with the matter at stake, which concerns an employment-related
dispute with an international dimension between an Ivorian player and a Saudi 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. 26 par. 1
and 2 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (August 2021 edition), and
considering that the present claim was lodged on 6 September 2021, the August 2021 edition
of said regulations (hereinafter: 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 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
19. 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
he considered pertinent for the assessment of the matter at hand.
i. Main legal discussion and considerations
Page 5
REF FPSD-3576
20. The foregoing having been established, the Single Judge moved to the substance of the
matter, and took note of the fact that the Respondent has partially admitted the claim albeit
contested the Claimant’s entitlement to the match bonuses claimed.
21. In this context, the Single Judge acknowledged that it its task was to ascertain the rightful
entitlement of the Claimant to the amounts requested.
22. In this regard, the Single Judge underlined that the Claimant solely provided his own witness
statement in support of his allegations. Furthermore, the Single Judge observed that these
match bonuses were not requested in the default notices sent to the Respondent prior to the
claim.
23. The Single Judge noted that in the case at hand the Claimant bore the burden of proving that
he was entitled to the match bonuses requested. Nonetheless, the evidence provided by the
Claimant (namely his own witness statement) does not prove beyond doubt the said
entitlement of the Claimant.
24. On account of the aforementioned, the Single Judge established that the Respondent,
without any valid reason, breached the terms of the Contract and failed to remit to the
Claimant the total amount of USD 40,000 as contractually agreed bonuses.
25. The Single Judge determined that in accordance with the general legal principle of pacta sunt
servanda, the Respondent was to pay the amount of USD 40,000 as outstanding amount to
the Claimant.
26. Furthermore, taking into consideration the Claimant’s request as well as the constant practice
of the Football Tribunal in this regard, the Single Judge decided to award the Claimant interest
on said amount at the rate of 5% p.a. as of 1 August 2021 until the date of effective payment.
ii. Compliance with monetary decisions
27. 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 his 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.
28. 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.
Page 6
REF FPSD-3576
29. 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.
30. 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.
31. 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
32. 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 Chamber decided that no procedural costs were to
be imposed on the parties.
33. 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.
34. Lastly, the Single Judge concluded his deliberations by rejecting any other requests for relief
made by any of the parties.
Page 7
REF FPSD-3576
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Ouatarra Soualia Dabila, is partially accepted.
2.
The Respondent, Alfayha FC, has to pay to the Claimant, the following amount(s):
- USD 40,000 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 August 2021 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 (August 2021
edition), if full payment (including all applicable interest) is not made within 45 days of
notification of this decision, the following consequences shall apply:
1.
2.
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.
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
Page 8
REF FPSD-3576
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