Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF FPSD-3121
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 27 October 2021
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the player Uros
Djuranovic
BY:
Jon Newman, USA
CLAIMANT:
Uros Djuranovic, Montenegro
Represented by Mr Filip Jovovic
RESPONDENT:
C.S.M. Poli lasi, Romania
Page 2
REF FPSD-3121
I.
Facts of the case
1.
On 13 January 2021, the Montenegrin player, Uros Djuranovic (hereinafter: the Claimant),
and the Romanian club, C.S.M. Poli lasi (hereinafter: the Respondent) signed an employment
contract, valid as from 15 January 2021 until 15 June 2021.
2.
In accordance with article 4.1 of the employment contract, the Respondent undertook to pay
to the Claimant inter alia Romanian Lei (LEI) 21,915 (equivalent to EUR 4,500), payable on
the 15th day of the respective month.
3.
Article 4.2 of the contract further states that “only in the case where the contract will be
extended as per article 2 paragraph 2.2 of the present contract, in exchange for the Player's
football activities as provided for in this Contract, the Club shall pay to him, for the period
16.06.2021 - 30.06.2022, the amount of LEI 24,350 (equivalent of EUR 5000 net monthly)”.
4.
Article 4.6 states that “throughout the entire period of the Contract, the Club shall provide
the Player, based on an expense claim, with the amount of LEI 1,220 on a monthly basis,
representing the rent fee for a dwelling that the Player shall rent on his own”.
5.
According to article 4.7 of the contract, the Player was also entitled to two flight tickets per
season.
6.
On 1 June 2021, the parties signed a mutual termination agreement according to which the
Club agreed to pay the Player the total amount of LEI 65,745, payable on 25 June 2021 at
the latest.
7.
Article 4 of the termination agreement states that “the Club and the Player mutually agreed
that if the Club will not pay the amount agreed at article 1 on 25 June 2021 at latest, the
present agreement is null and void”.
8.
By correspondence dated 17 May 2021, the Claimant put the Respondent in default of
payment of EUR 9,000 (LEI 43,830) as outstanding salaries, linked to the period between
March and April 2021, setting a time limit of 15 days in order to remedy the default, however
to no avail.
II. Proceedings before FIFA
9.
On 22 July 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
Page 3
REF FPSD-3121
10. According to the Claimant, starting from March 2021, the Respondent was late to pay his
salaries and rent for March and April 2021, which situation prolonged until May 2021, when
he sent a default notice, demanding payment of EUR 9,000 (LEI 43,830).
11. The Claimant adds that further to the above default, the parties signed a mutual termination
agreement on 1 June 2021, based on which the Respondent agreed to pay to him LEI 65,745
on 25 June 2021, at the latest, however to no avail.
12. According to the Claimant, in accordance with article 4 of the termination agreement, said
agreement became null and void and that his financial obligations deriving from the contract
dated 13 January 2021 were reinstituted, as legitimate claim for his services.
13. The requests for relief of the Claimant, were the following:
The amounts of LEI 80,972.50 and EUR 264, in accordance with the contract, plus 5%
interest p.a. as of the due dates until the effective date of payment as follows:
Salaries
on the amount of LEI 21,915 as of 16 April 2021;
on the amount of LEI 21,915 as of 16 May 2021;
on the amount of LEI 21,915 as of 16 June 2021;
on the amount of LEI 10,957.50 as of 16 July 2021.
Rent
on the amount of LEI 1,220 as of 16 April 2021;
on the amount of LEI 1,220 as of 16 May 2021;
on the amount of LEI 1,220 as of 16 June 2021;
on the amount of LEI 610 as of 16 July 2021.
EUR 264 as reimbursement of the costs of 1 round-trip flight ticket.
b. Position of the Respondent
14. Despite being invited to do so, the Respondent did not reply to the claim within the granted
deadline.
15. However, on 30 September 2021, the Respondent sent another letter to the FIFA
Administration stating that on 19 August 2021, it made payment of LEI 65,745 to the
Claimant as corresponding to salaries for March to May 2021. The Respondent also submitted
a payment order for the above amount to the FIFA Administration.
Page 4
REF FPSD-3121
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
16. First of all, the Single Judge of 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, it took note that the present matter was presented to FIFA on 23 July 2021 and
submitted for decision on 27 October 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.
17. Subsequently, the members of the DRC 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 (August 2021 edition) and art. 24 par.1 of
the Procedural Rules, the Single Judge is competent to deal with the matter at stake, which
concerns an employment-related dispute with an international dimension between a
Montenegrin player and a Romanian club.
18. Subsequently, the Single Judge 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 Player (August 2021 edition and
considering that the present claim was lodged on 23 July 2021, the February 2021 edition of
said regulations (hereinafter: the Regulations) is applicable to the matter at hand as to the
substance.
b. Burden of proof
19. 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
20. 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
Page 5
REF FPSD-3121
considerations it 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
21. The foregoing having been established, the Single Judge moved to the substance of the
matter, and took note of the fact that the parties signed a contract on 13 January 2021 and
later signed a mutual termination agreement on 1 June 2021 according to which the
Respondent agreed to pay the Claimant LEI 65,745 on 25 June 2021, however, to no avail.
22. In continuation, the Single Judge took note of the Claimant’s submission that due to the
Respondent’s failure to comply with the provisions of the termination agreement, article 4 of
the termination agreement applies, which makes the settlement agreement null and void.
Therefore, the Single Judge deemed that the Claimant is therefore in principle entitled to
outstanding remuneration in the amount of LEI 80,972.50, in accordance with the contract.
23. The foregoing having been established, the Single Judge moved to the substance of the
matter and took note of the fact that the Respondent did not reply to the Claim within the
given timeline and that, in principle, the claim of the Claimant remained uncontested.
24. However, the Single Judge noted that on 30 September 2021, the Respondent sent another
letter to the FIFA Administration stating that on 19 August 2021 (after the claim had been
filed), it made payment of LEI 65,745 to the Claimant as corresponding to salaries for March
to May 2021. The Respondent also submitted a payment order for the above amount to the
FIFA Administration.
25. Furthermore, the Single Judge noted that the Claimant confirmed receipt of said payment in
the amount of LEI 65,745.
26. With the above in mind, the Single Judge, at his discretion, deemed that said payment should
be taken into account when calculating the amounts due to the Claimant.
27. Consequently, the Single Judge decided that in accordance with the general legal principle
of pacta sunt servanda, the Respondent is liable to pay to the Claimant the amounts which
remained (uncontestably) outstanding under the contract.
ii. Consequences
28. 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.
29. Taking into account the fact that the claim remained uncontested by the Respondent and the
contents of the contract and termination agreement between the parties, the Single Judge
decided that based on the documentation and arguments provided by the Claimant, as well
Page 6
REF FPSD-3121
as based on the principle of pacta sunt servanda, the Respondent shall pay LEI 15,227.5 (the
total outstanding amount of LEI 80,972.50 -/- the confirmed partial payment of LEI 65,745)
as outstanding remuneration to the Claimant.
30. In addition, taking into consideration the Claimant’s request as well as the constant practice
of the Chamber in this regard, the latter decided to award the Claimant interest at the rate
of 5% p.a. on the outstanding amounts as from the due dates until the date of effective
payment as follows:
-
on the amount of LEI 10,957.50 as of 16 July 2021;
on the amount of LEI 1,220 (rent allowance) as of 16 April 2021;
on the amount of LEI 1,220 (rent allowance) as of 16 May 2021;
on the amount of LEI 1,220 (rent allowance) as of 16 June 2021;
on the amount of LEI 610 (rent allowance) as of 16 July 2021.
31. Lastly, in accordance with article 4.7 of the contract and taking into account the Claimant’s
request, the Single Judge further decided that the Claimant is entitled to EUR 264 as
reimbursement for the flight tickets.
iii. Compliance with monetary decisions
32. Finally, taking into account the applicable Regulations, the Single Judge referred to art. 24bis
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.
33. 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.
34. 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. 24bis par. 2, 4, and 7 of the Regulations.
35. 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.
Page 7
REF FPSD-3121
36. 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. 24bis par.
8 of the Regulations.
d. Costs
37. 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 DRC Judge decided that no procedural costs were
to be imposed on the parties.
38. 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.
39. Lastly, the Single Judge concluded his deliberations by rejecting any other requests for relief
made by any of the parties.
Page 8
REF FPSD-3121
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Uros Djuranovic, is partially accepted.
2.
The Respondent, C.S.M. Poli Iasi, has to pay to the Claimant, LEI 15,227.5 as outstanding
remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. until the date of effective payment as follows:
-
on the amount of LEI 10,957.50 as of 16 July 2021;
on the amount of LEI 1,220 as of 16 April 2021;
on the amount of LEI 1,220 as of 16 May 2021;
on the amount of LEI 1,220 as of 16 June 2021;
on the amount of LEI 610 as of 16 July 2021.
3.
The Respondent has to pay EUR 264 for one round trip ticket.
4.
Any further claims of the Claimant are rejected.
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. 24bis 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 the ban shall
be of 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.
7. The consequences shall only be enforced at the request of the Claimant in accordance
with art. 24bis par. 7 and 8 and art. 24ter 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
Page 9
REF FPSD-3121
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 10