Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF. FPSD-18099
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 20 May 2025
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the player Ericson
Jorge Silva Rodrigues Duarte
BY:
Mario FLORES CHEMOR, Mexico
CLAIMANT:
Ericson Jorge Silva Rodrigues Duarte, Cape Verde Islands
Represented by Pedro Macieirinha
RESPONDENT:
Vilaverdense FC, Portugal
pg. 2
REF. FPSD-18099
I. Facts of the case
1.
On 14 July 2022, the player from Cape Verde Island, Ericson Jorge Silva Rodrigues Duarte
(hereinafter: the Player or the Claimant), and the club from Portugal, Vilaverdense Futebol
Clube (hereinafter: the Club or the Respondent), entered into an employment contract
(hereinafter: the First Contract) valid as from 1 August 2022 until 30 June 2023.
2.
Pursuant to clause 5 of the First Contract, the Club undertook to pay to the Player a total
sum of EUR 17,500 net, payable in 10 instalments of EUR 1,750 net, due at the end of each
month, commencing on 31 August 2022.
3.
Pursuant to clause 6.1 of the First Contract, the Player would be entitled to a bonus of EUR
500 net for every 5 official matches he played.
4.
Pursuant to clause 6.2, lit. a) of the First Contract, the Player would be entitled to a bonus
of EUR 2,500 if the Club reached the play-offs in the qualifiers for the higher division.
5.
Pursuant to clause 6.2, lit. b) of the First Contract, the Player would be entitled to a bonus
of EUR 5,000 if the Club achieved the promotion to the higher division.
6.
Furthermore, clause 6.4 of the First Contract provided that all bonuses under the Contract
would be paid within the term of the First Contract and by no later than 60 days after its
expiry.
7.
On 30 March 2023, the Club issued a communication confirming that it would pay a
collective bonus of EUR 5,000 to the players in its squad and the coaching staff “subject to
the Club’s effective qualification to compete in Liga 2 in Portugal in the 2023/2024 season”. The
same letter stated that the payment would be made by 31 December 2023.
8.
On 30 June 2023, the First Contract expired.
9.
On 9 July 2023, the Player and the Club entered into another employment contract
(hereinafter: the Second Contract), which was valid as from the date of signing until 30 June
2024.
10. Clause 4.2 of the Contract provided that:
Original in Portuguese:
“4.2. Os outorgantes acordam que o presente contrato revoga todos os efeitos dos
contratos de trabalho desportivo celebrados anteriormente”.
Freely translated into English by the Player:
pg. 3
REF. FPSD-18099
“4.2. The Parties agree that this contract revokes all the effects of the sports work
contracts previously concluded”.
11. Pursuant to clause 5 of the Second Contract, the Club undertook to pay to the Player a total
sum of EUR 39,200, payable in 10 instalments due by the 5th day of each month,
commencing on 5 August 2023.
12. On 14 August 2024, the Player sent a notice of default to the Club, demanding payment of
EUR 14,000 net under the First Contract and the Club’s letter of 30 March 2023; and EUR
14,909.98 under the Second Contract. The Player requested that the Club remedy the
breach within 10 days.
13. On 26 August 2024, the Player submitted a first claim against the Club (formerly known as
Associação Lank FC) to the FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: the DRC), which
was registered under case ref. no. FPSD-15762. The Player’s request for relief in the
aforementioned claim was as follows, quoted verbatim:
“The Claim shall be accepted.
The Dispute Resolution Chamber shall condemn the Respondent Club to pay to the
Claimant the overdue payables in the amount of
i) monthly house allowances:
October 2023 in the amount of 450,00 €;
November 2023 in the amount of 450,00 €;
December 2023 in the amount of 450,00 €;
January 2024 in the amount of 450,00 €;
February 2024 in the amount of 450,00 €;
March 2024 in the amount of 450,00 €;
April 2024 in the amount of 450,00 €;
May 2024 in the amount of 450,00 €;
June 2024 in the amount of 450,00 €;
July 2024 in the amount of 450,00 €.
pg. 4
REF. FPSD-18099
Total of 4 500,00 € plus interest at 5 % rate since the overdue dates until effective
payment.
ii) monthly salaries:
Salary of April 2024 in the amount of 3 266,66 €;
Salary of May 2024 in the amount of 3 266,66 €;
Salary of June 2024 in the amount of 3 266,66 €;
Total of 9 799,98 € plus interest at 5 % rate since the overdue dates until effective
payment.
iii) 160.00 € regarding a medical treatment in a private health clinic;
iv) Total of 14 459,98 €, plus interest at 5 % rate since the overdue dates until effective
payment.
All according to the Sporting Employment Contract signed by the parties, the FIFA Statutes
and regulations, as well the specificity of sport, under penalty of imposition of disciplinary
measures to the Respondent if the above obligation is not observed”.
14. On 8 October 2024, the DRC issued its decision in the above case, the findings of which
were notified to the parties on 25 October 2024 (hereinafter: the First Decision).
15. In accordance with the First Decision, the Club was ordered to pay the following amounts
to the Player:
“- EUR 14,459.98 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as follows:
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of EUR 8,500 as from 30 August 2023 until the
date of effective payment;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of EUR 5,000 as from 1 January 2024 until the
date of effective payment;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of EUR 959.98 as from 6 May 2024 until the date
of effective payment”.
16. Any further claims by the Player were rejected.
17. On 20 December 2024, a transfer ban was imposed on the Club for failure to comply with
the First Decision.
pg. 5
REF. FPSD-18099
II. Current proceedings before FIFA
18. On 5 February 2025, the Player filed this claim before FIFA. A summary of the parties’
respective positions is detailed below.
a. Position of the Player
19. In his claim, the Player recalled the wording of the two contracts signed between the parties
and the outcome of the First Decision. The Player explained that due to a (sic) “typo digital
mistake”, he had not included part of his credit in his request for relief previously submitted
to the DRC.
20. In particular, the Player claimed that he was entitled to the following sums, which were not
discussed in the first proceeding, quoted verbatim:
i)
1 500,00 € net - Sixth Clause of the employment contract;
ii)
2 500,00 € net - Sixth Clause, nr. 2.a) of the employment contract;
iii) 5 000.00 € net - Sixth Clause, nr. 2.b) of the employment contract;
iv) 5 000.00 € net - Notice of Extraordinary Result Award dated 30 March 2023;
v)
Total of 14 000,00 € net, plus interest at 5% rate since the overdue dates until effective
payment.
21. The Player then requested that he be awarded the abovementioned amounts: “All
according to the Sporting Employment Contract signed by the parties, the FIFA Statutes and
regulations, as well the specificity of sport, under penalty of imposition of disciplinary measures
to the Respondent if the above obligation is not observed”.
b. Position of the Club
22. The Club failed to respond to the claim.
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
23. First of all, the Single Judge of the DRC (hereinafter: the Single Judge) analyzed whether he
was competent to deal with the case at hand. In this respect, he took note that the present
pg. 6
REF. FPSD-18099
matter was presented to FIFA on 5 February 2025 and submitted for decision on 20 May
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.
24. 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 Cape Verdean player and a Portuguese club.
25. For the sake of completeness, the Single Judge acknowledged at this point that the Player
had previously submitted a claim to the DRC but had inadvertently omitted a part of his
request for relief.
26. Although the Single Judge was not impressed by the Player’s procedural misconduct, he
found that the object of the two claims (petitum and causa petendi) was different, and
therefore interpreted that there was no res judicata. Furthermore, and in the absence of
any challenge by the Club, the Single Judge further considered that there was no apparent
bad faith on the part of the Player and concluded that this claim was therefore admissible.
27. Subsequently, the Single Judge analyzed 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
28. 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
29. 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 emphasized that in the following
pg. 7
REF. FPSD-18099
considerations he will refer only to the facts, arguments and documentary evidence, which
he considered pertinent for assessing the matter at hand.
i. Main legal discussion and considerations
30. The Single Judge then moved to the substance of the matter, noting that it concerned a
claim for overdue payables brought by a player against a club.
31. The Single Judge observed that the Player claimed that he was entitled to contractual and
collective bonuses in accordance with the First Contract signed by the parties and the
communication issued by the Club on 30 March 2023. Furthermore, the Player stated that
he had already claimed outstanding remuneration before the DRC, but that he mistakenly
omitted a part of his entitlements.
32. On the other hand, the Single Judge similarly noted that the Club did not respond to the
Player’s claim and therefore recognized that his decision should be taken solely on the
basis of the documents submitted by the Player (cf., art. 21, par. 1 of the Procedural Rules).
33. In this context, the Single Judge acknowledged that his task was to determine whether the
Player was entitled to the sums claimed and what consequences, if any, should be drawn
from this assessment.
34. Considering the above, and as a starting point, the Single Judge recalled that the Player’s
alleged entitlement arose from the First Contract in combination with the Club’s
communication of 30 March 2023.
35. Although the Single Judge found that his claim appeared to have a contractual basis and
was supported by documentary evidence, the Single Judge deemed it essential that a new
employment contract had been signed by the same parties on 9 July 2023, extending their
relationship.
36. Most importantly, the Single Judge emphasized that the Second Contract clearly and
explicitly stated the following:
Original in Portuguese:
“4.2. Os outorgantes acordam que o presente contrato revoga todos os efeitos dos
contratos de trabalho desportivo celebrados anteriormente”.
Freely translated into English by the Player:
“4.2. The Parties agree that this contract revokes all the effects of the sports work
contracts previously concluded”.
pg. 8
REF. FPSD-18099
37. According to the Single Judge, by entering into such an agreement a posteriori and without
any reservation of rights, the parties superseded the First Contract and any supplementary
document signed by them before that date. As a result, the Single Judge was of the opinion
that neither of the parties was entitled to enforce any residual obligations under the First
Contract.
38. The Single Judge stressed that the above, together with the fact that the sums now claimed
were already omitted from the first claim, was sufficient to support his conclusion that the
Player’s claim should not succeed.
39. The Single Judge therefore dismissed the claim on its entirety.
d. Costs
40. 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.
41. 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.
42. Lastly, the Single Judge concluded his deliberations by rejecting any other requests for
relief made by any of the parties.
pg. 9
REF. FPSD-18099
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Ericson Jorge Silva Rodrigues Duarte, is rejected.
2.
This decision is rendered without costs.
For the Football Tribunal:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
pg. 10
REF. FPSD-18099
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. 11