Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF. FPSD-15543
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 11 December 2025
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the player Siaka
Bagayoko
COMPOSITION:
Frans DE WEGER (The Netherlands), Chairperson
Michele COLUCCI (Italy), Member
Dana MOHAMED AL-NOAIMI (Qatar), Member
CLAIMANT/COUNTER-RESPONDENT:
Siaka Bagayoko, Mali
Represented by Fifpro Division Africa
RESPONDENT/COUNTERCLAIMANT:
Al Qasim, Iraq
Represented by Ammar Asfour
pg. 2
REF. FPSD-15543
I. Facts of the case
1.
On an unspecified date, the Malian player Siaka Bagayoko (hereinafter: the Player or the
Claimant/Counter-Respondent) and the Iraqi club Al Qasim (hereinafter: the Club or the
Respondent/Counterclaimant) entered into an employment contract (hereinafter: the
Contract) valid as from 15 January 2024 until 15 July 2024.
2.
Pursuant to the Contract, the Player was entitled to receive a total of USD 15,000, to be
paid at the end of each month (USD 2,500 monthly over 6 months). There was also a clause
inserted in what appeared to be an annex to the Contract stating as follows (quoted
verbatim):
“6. Other entitlements: professional player
The Club shall provide the Player for each season with housing, a car and __ return flights return
tickets normal / economy class for the route (IRAQ - _______ - IRAQ) with a total value of ______ per
As agreed by the parties each season.”
3.
Furthermore, clause 7 of the same annex to the Contract established that “The Player’s
income refers to net amounts in the Any taxes, social costs, contributions or State of IRAQ. any
other amounts the Player may need to pay in the country of his residence or any other country
are to be borne by the Player and the Club insofar shall not be obliged to pay any additional
amounts to the player as those agreed upon in this Contract.”
4.
On 15 April 2024, the Player sent a notice of default for the salaries corresponding to
February and March 2024 (USD 5,000 in total). The Player acknowledged that he
subsequently received those salaries.
5.
On 19 June 2024, the Player sent another default notice to the Club, indicating that he had
not received his salary for the month of June 2024 and requesting that the Club provide
medical treatment for a knee injury suffered on 20 May 2024, as well as to provide him with
an exit visa and a return ticket since his Contract was coming to an end. The Player also
indicated that the Club had not been responding to him and granted the Club 7 days to
remedy the above-described breaches.
6.
On 20 June 2024, the Player signed a Final Clearance (hereinafter: the Final Clearance)
stating the following (quoted verbatim):
“
Final clearance
I am the player BAGAYOKO SIAKA, I hold a passport from the Republic of Mali with the number
AA1115112
I acknowledge, with full legal capacity and without any pressure or coercion, that I have received
all the sums due to me under my contract with the Iraqi Al-Qassim Club, in addition to all the
pg. 3
REF. FPSD-15543
costs of treatment and hospitalization, and I consider that the Iraqi Al-Qassem Sports Club has
completely cleared its responsibility towards me, so I sign and fingerprint it.
Note: According to this document, the player is considered a free agent and has the right to sign
for any other club inside and outside Iraq, taking into account FIFA regulations
(Termination of contracts by mutual agreement)
Signature of the President of Al-Qasim Sports Club
Mr. Hussein Al-Kaabi
[club seal and signature affixed]
[fingerprints and signature affixed]
Signature and fingerprint of the
player BAGAYOKO SIAKA
2024-6-20”
7.
On 22 June 2024, the Player bought his flight ticket back to Mali.
8.
According to the information on available on the FIFA Transfer Matching System
(hereinafter: TMS), the Congolese club, AS Vita, initiated a transfer instruction to engage the
Player out of contract on 8 July 2024. The proof of last contract end date uploaded with the
instruction is the Final Clearance. The Player’s International Transfer Certificate
(hereinafter: ITC) was requested on 9 July 2024 and released by the Iraqi Football
Association (hereinafter: the IFA) on 11 July 2024. The IFA further noted the Player´s
deregistration date as 19 June 2024 in the instruction.
9.
The Player’s new employment contract with AS Vita had a start date of 1 July 2024 and
would end on 1 July 2026, with the Player earning USD 3,000 net per month during the
2024/2025 season, USD 3,500 net during the 2025/2026 season, and receiving a signing fee
of USD 10,000 and a monthly housing stipend of USD 300.
10. Also according to TMS, the applicable registration period in Congo DR lasted from 3 July
2024 to 21 September 2024, whereas the season dates were apparently from 1 August
2024 until 31 May 2025.
II. Proceedings before FIFA
11. On 12 August 2024, the Player filed the claim at hand before FIFA. A summary of the parties’
respective positions is detailed below.
pg. 4
REF. FPSD-15543
a. Claim of the Claimant/Counter-Respondent
12. The Player lodged a claim with FIFA for outstanding remuneration and reimbursement for
the flight ticket he paid to return home.
13. The Player contended that he shall be entitled to all payments that remained outstanding
for the 2023/2024 season, as he could not waive any of his entitlements.
14. Furthermore, at the time of signing the Final Clearance, he was owed USD 5,000
corresponding to the salaries of May and June 2024, he was owed a flight ticket to return
home, he was injured, he needed the Club’s support to obtain his exit visa, and the Contract
was due to expire. In this respect, he averred that he signed the Final Clearance under
straitened circumstances and that the document shall, therefore, be disregarded as it is
null and void.
15. Even if the straitened circumstances are not acknowledged, the Final Clearance is
nonetheless null and void as it was of an imbalanced nature, lacking reciprocal concessions.
16. In support of his allegations, the Player referred to CAS jurisprudence and art. 341 of the
Swiss Code of Obligations.
17. The Player’s request for relief was as follows:
“D) Request for Relief:
14. As a consequence of all of the above, the Player is requesting the FIFA DRC to sanction the
club on the basis of art. 12bis of the FIFA RSTP and to order the Club to pay him the following
amounts:
I. USD 2,500 for the salary of May, plus 5% interest p.a. as of 1 June 2024 until the date of
effective payment.
II. USD 2,500 for the salary of June, plus 5% interest p.a. as of 1 July 2024 until the date of
effective payment.
III. EUR 816 for reimbursement of flight ticket, plus 5% interest p.a. as of 1 July 2024 until the
date of effective payment.”
b. Reply and counterclaim of the Respondent/Counterclaimant
18. In its reply, the Club rejected any allegations concerning the invalidity of the Final
Clearance. It was mutually agreed between the parties of their own free will in order to
terminate their employment relationship. Therefore, “any and all legal or financial effect
prior to signing the termination document by mutual consent has ended.”
pg. 5
REF. FPSD-15543
19. The Club provided conversations allegedly exchanged between the Player and the Club’s
president via the messaging platform, WhatsApp, which took place after the Contract
ended, whereby the Player requested the Club’s assistance to obtain his ITC so that he
could join AS Vita.
20. Furthermore, the Club provided WhatsApp conversations and a doctor’s report indicating
that the Player had a knee injury, that he received care from the club’s doctor (including an
X-ray), and that the Player had refused to undergo the routine procedure required for such
injury, thus confirming the Player received “all medical care,” contrary to what he stated.
21. In addition, the Club maintained that the price of the flight ticket that the Player paid was
part of the agreement to terminate his contract by mutual consent and was included in the
agreement. Therefore, he could not now claim it.
22. Thus, in reply to the claim, the Club’s request for relief was the following:
“First: Consider the amicable termination agreement signed between the two parties on June 20,
2024, No. 114, valid and effective because it was concluded between the two parties while they
were in full legal and legitimate capacity and without pressure or coercion.
Second: Reject the complaint submitted by the player in this case in its entirety.
Third: The club considers submitting this complaint after signing the amicable termination
agreement does not include any good faith and its purpose is to offend the club and its fans in
front of various sports institutions and is considered very bad sports behavior, so the club
requests compensation for damages and losses from the player in the amount of fifteen
thousand US dollars.”
23. In light of the third point in the above request for relief, the FIFA general secretariat
requested that the Club confirm whether it intended to file a counterclaim and, if so, to
complete such counterclaim. The Club did so on 14 May 2025, requesting the amount of
USD 15,000 from the Player as a result of his breach of contract, which it contended
represented the entire value of the Contract.
24. In its correspondence from 14 May 2025, the Club also reiterated that the mutual
termination agreement dated 20 June 2024 was legally valid.
25. As such, the Club’s amended request for relief was as follows:
“1= We confirm everything we have previously sent to you in our previous letters.
2= We agree to continue the counterclaim against the plaintiff player.
3= We confirm that the player is acting in bad faith and has no rights in this case.
pg. 6
REF. FPSD-15543
4= We request that the plaintiff’s lawsuit be dismissed in its entirety.
5= We request that the plaintiff be ordered to pay the sum of $15,000, as previously stated.”
c. Reply to the Counterclaim
26. In his reply to the counterclaim, the Player rejected the Club’s counterclaim as unfounded.
The breaches of contract alleged by the Club occurred after the end of the employment
(alleged bad faith behaviour, breach of contractual dispositions) cannot be regarded as a
breach of contract.
27. The Player further submitted that the screenshots of conversations provided were
undated, did not identify the participants, and were thus of little probative value, in
addition to failing to establish what the Club alleged (that the Player refused to follow
medical instructions).
28. Moreover, the Player argued that the Club’s stance was contradictory, as it on one hand
argued that the Settlement Agreement was valid and on the other argued that it was
entitled to damages for breach of the Contract.
pg. 7
REF. FPSD-15543
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
29. 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 12 August 2024 and submitted for decision
on 11 December 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.
30. 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) (July 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 Malian player and an Iraqi club.
31. 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 July 2025 edition of the Regulations is applicable to the matter at hand as
to the substance.
b. Burden of proof
32. 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).
c. Merits of the dispute
33. 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.
pg. 8
REF. FPSD-15543
i. Main legal discussion and considerations
34. The Chamber then moved to the substance of the matter, and took note of the fact that
the parties strongly disputed the validity of the Final Clearance document signed between
them.
35. On one hand, the Player maintained that the document was null and void, alleging inter alia
that it was signed under straitened circumstances and, in any case, he could not have
validly waived salaries for work performed. On the other hand, the Club maintained that
the Final Clearance was freely entered into by the parties and was a valid termination
agreement barring the Player from claiming any additional amounts, in addition to
submitting a counterclaim for damages in the amount of USD 15,000 and citing breaches
of the Contract.
36. Bearing the foregoing in mind, the Chamber began its deliberations by recalling the precise
wording and contents of the Final Clearance (reproduced in its entirety in par. 6 ut supra),
as this document lay at the heart of the dispute between the parties:
“
Final clearance
I am the player BAGAYOKO SIAKA, I hold a passport from the Republic of Mali with the number
AA1115112
I acknowledge, with full legal capacity and without any pressure or coercion, that I have received
all the sums due to me under my contract with the Iraqi Al-Qassim Club, in addition to all the
costs of treatment and hospitalization, and I consider that the Iraqi Al-Qassem Sports Club has
completely cleared its responsibility towards me, so I sign and fingerprint it.
Note: According to this document, the player is considered a free agent and has the right to sign
for any other club inside and outside Iraq, taking into account FIFA regulations
(Termination of contracts by mutual agreement) […]”
37. The Chamber observed that the above-cited document contained an express
acknowledgement from the Player that he had received all sums due to him under the
Contract, as well as all the costs of treatment and hospitalization. It further noted that the
Final Clearance referenced the fact that it was a “Termination of contracts by mutual
agreement” and that the Player was henceforth a free agent and had the right to sign for
any other club inside and outside of Iraq.
38. Considering the above, the Chamber observed that, while the literal wording of the Final
Clearance stated that the Player received all amounts due to him and did not a prior seem
to be an explicit waiver of salaries for work performed (but rather was phrased as an
acknowledgement of no debt outstanding), the Player nonetheless averred that he did not
in fact receive his salaries for May and June 2024.
pg. 9
REF. FPSD-15543
39. In this sense, the Chamber further recalled that the mere signing of a contract is not
sufficient to ensure the enforceability of its contents. Rather, the Football Tribunal’s wellestablished jurisprudence on the subject of an employee’s waiver of remuneration
establishes that, (i) generally speaking, a player cannot waive remuneration for
work already performed; and (ii) in any case, in order to assess whether a transaction
is permissible, the court or deciding body is required to conduct a balancing of
interests, checking whether the reciprocal claims waived by each party are of comparable
value, i.e., whether there is an appropriate equivalence between the parties’ reciprocal
concessions.
40. Therefore, for the sake of completeness, the Chamber proceeded to analyse if there were
reciprocal concessions made by and between the parties, in order to examine if, in fact it
could be considered that the Final Clearance contained a waiver, such a waiver could be
valid.
41. In light of the above, the majority of the Chamber specifically noted the following:
-
The Player was released from his Contract almost a month in advance of its expiry,
as the Final Clearance was dated 20 June 2024 and the Contract would have expired
on 15 July 2024.
-
The Player signed with AS Vita on 1 July 2024 and received a monthly salary of USD
3,000 net for the first season and USD 3,500 net for the second season (i.e., a higher
salary than with the Club), in addition to receiving a signing fee of USD 10,000 and a
monthly housing stipend of USD 300.
-
AS Vita was apparently furnished with a copy of the Final Clearance document to
and it was uploaded onto TMS as the proof of the Player’s contract end date in the
context of AS Vita’s ITC request for the Player, which took place on 9 July 2024. The
information that was input on TMS declared that the Player and his former club had
mutually agreed on an early termination on 20 June 2024.
-
The Player’s default notices to the Club prior to signing the Final Clearance referred
to inter alia the salary of June 2024, but not May 2024 (which was, however, claimed
before FIFA).
-
The Player claimed to have signed the Final Clearance under straitened
circumstances, as he indicated he was injured and needed the Club’s assistance to
obtain his exit visa, but no convincing proof was provided in this respect (cf. art. 13
par. 5 of the Procedural Rules). Conversely, the Club denied the existence of
straitened circumstances and insisted the Final Clearance was the product of the
parties’ free will.
-
The Club provided WhatsApp messages – purportedly with the Player, and which the
pg. 10
REF. FPSD-15543
Player did not outright deny as having been exchanged with him – where the Player
appeared to request that the Club indicate in the termination letter discussed that
the Player would be a free agent and for the Club to facilitate his ITC. Therefore, it
could be inferred that the Player was interested in joining a new club in the very
short term.
-
The Player made no further demands for the allegedly outstanding salaries of May
and June 2024 after signing the Final Clearance until he filed his claim before FIFA on
12 August 2024.
42. Furthermore, the majority of the Chamber noted that, considering the contractual terms
at issue as well as the allegations put forth, the Player would have allegedly given up his
May and June salaries, for a total of USD 5,000. However, the majority of the Chamber also
understood from the evidence on file that the Player received a USD 10,000 signing bonus
and a USD 3,000 net monthly salary from AS Vita, beginning on 1 July 2024. Thus, the
majority of the Chamber considered that the salaries allegedly waived would have
nevertheless been counterbalanced by the Player’s ability to have signed a more lucrative
contract a mere 11 days after terminating the Contract. Furthermore, the majority of the
Chamber opined that if the May and June salaries were in fact not paid, these would have
been savings on the Club’s part.
43. Based on the foregoing, the majority of the Chamber was inclined to conclude that there
were concessions of equivalent nature made by and between the parties upon signing the
Final Clearance. The Player was able, with his earlier release from the Contract, to be
promptly engaged in a more profitable contract for an additional 2 years, while the amount
waived would be immediately covered by his signing bonus. By the same token, the
majority of the Chamber also noted that, because the registration period in Congo DR
opened on 3 July 2024, it was possible that the new club wished to engage the Player
immediately, whereas if the Player had waited until the expiry of the Contract on 15 July
2024, the new club might have retained someone else’s services.
44. Considering the above and given that the Chamber, by majority, found that there were
reciprocal concessions by and between the parties on the declaration, the majority of the
Chamber concluded that the Final Clearance (and any waiver contained therein) signed by
the Player was valid, and therefore it should be enforced to the effect that no amounts can
be claimed from the Club.
45. Hence, the majority of the Chamber held that the claim of the Claimant in this respect shall
be rejected.
46. For the sake of completeness, the majority of the Chamber also noted that the flight ticket
claimed by the Player was apparently purchased on 22 June 2024, i.e., after signing the Final
Clearance containing the acknowledgement that the Club had cleared all responsibilities
towards the Player. Thus, having determined that the Final Clearance was valid and binding
pg. 11
REF. FPSD-15543
among the parties, the majority of the Chamber held that the claim for reimbursement
shall similarly be rejected.
47. As to the Club’s counterclaim, the Chamber considered that the Club did not substantiate
or prove any factual, contractual, or legal basis for its claim for damages in the amount of
USD 15,000. While it was presented as a claim for breach of contract, the Chamber
considered that the Club essentially adopted a contradictory stance of seeking to uphold
the Final Clearance while also alleging breaches of the Contract. Ultimately, as the Final
Clearance was found to be, by the majority of the Chamber, valid and binding among the
parties, the Club’s claim for breach of contract cannot succeed. Therefore, the Chamber
decided to reject the Club’s counterclaim in its entirety.
d. Costs
48. 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.
49. 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.
50. Lastly, the DRC concluded its deliberations by rejecting any other requests for relief made
by any of the parties.
pg. 12
REF. FPSD-15543
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant/Counter-Respondent, Siaka Bagayoko, is rejected.
2.
The counterclaim of the Respondent/Counterclaimant, Al Qasim, is rejected.
3.
This decision is rendered without costs.
For the Football Tribunal:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
pg. 13
REF. FPSD-15543
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. 14