Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF. FPSD-17557
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 7 October 2025
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning
the player Wasiu Olalekan Hamzat
COMPOSITION:
Lívia SILVA KÄGI (Brazil & Switzerland), Deputy Chairwoman
Michele COLUCCI (Italy), Member
Oleg ZADUBROVSKIY (Russia), Member
CLAIMANT:
Wasiu Olalekan Hamzat, Nigeria
Represented by Amin Yusuf
RESPONDENT:
FC Lubumbashi Sport, Congo DR
pg. 2
REF. FPSD-17557
I. Facts of the case
1.
The parties to this dispute are:
•
The Nigerian player Wasiu Olalekan Hamzat (hereinafter: the Player or the Claimant);
•
The Congolese club FC Lubumbashi Sport (hereinafter: the Club or the Respondent),
affiliated to the Fédération Congolaise de Football-Association (hereinafter: FECOFA).
2.
On 12 September 2023, the Club issued an invitation letter to the Congolese Embassy in
Nigeria, expressing its gratitude for granting the Player a tourist visa. The Club stated that
the purpose of the visa was to enable the Player to visit the Club and engage in negotiations
regarding the potential signing of a contract. The Club indicated that the negotiations
would take place in September 2023 and that it would bear all related expenses.
3.
On 18 September 2023, a visa was issued to the Player by the Congolese Embassy in
Nigeria, valid for entry into Congo DR from 20 September 2023 until 19 October 2023.
4.
On 30 September 2023, the Player’s International Transfer Certificate (hereinafter: ITC) was
issued by the Nigerian Football Association (hereinafter: NFA) in favour of the FECOFA.
5.
According to the Player, on an unspecified date, he and the Club entered into an
employment contract (hereinafter: the Alleged Contract) valid from 20 October 2023 until 20
September 2024.
6.
According to the Player, the Club undertook to pay him a monthly salary of USD 800 from
October 2023 to September 2024.
7.
On 30 November 2023, the Player’s visa was extended for 30 days.
8.
On 22 March 2024, a flight ticket was issued for the Player to fly from Lubumbashi (Congo
DR) to Addis Ababa (Ethiopia) on 23 March 2024, and from Addis Ababa (Ethiopia) to Abuja
(Nigeria) on 24 March 2024.
9.
On 23 March 2024, the Player left Congo DR.
10. On 23 July 2024, the Club issued a release letter to the Player.
11. On 2 August 2024, the Player sent a letter to the Club, arguing that he joined the Club on 4
October 2023. The Player stated that the parties signed the Alleged Contract, valid as from
October 2023 until September 2024, and that he was entitled to a monthly salary of USD
800. The Player further contended that the Club retained his copy of the Contract and only
paid him USD 800 for October 2023. The Player stated that the Club finally paid him USD
1,000 and gave him a return ticket at the end of the season in March 2024. Lastly, the Player
pg. 3
REF. FPSD-17557
alleged that the president of the Club promised to send him the balance of USD 12,000 and
USD 20,000 for damages and issued a clearance in July 2024. The Player granted the Club
15 days to provide him with the Contract and to respond to his letter, providing
confirmation of the recruitment, contract terms and his registration details.
12. On 26 August 2024, a Club representative replied to the Player’s email as follows (quoted
verbatim):
“BHello, you are a little scammer. The player had a trial with us for only 3 months and he
did not pass the test. There has never been an agent, he a free player and everything you
have reported is false. Thank you.”
13. Also on 26 August 2024, the Player replied to the email, arguing that he participated in
league and competitive matches for the Club during six months. The Player alleged that he
joined the Club on 4 October 2023 and was released on 23 March 2024. In this regard, the
Player clarified that the Club requested his ITC, that he received an identity card to be able
to participate in official matches and that he received a release letter. Based on this, the
Player again requested clarification.
14. On 31 August 2024, the Player sent a new letter reiterating that it was clear that an
employment relationship existed between the parties. The Player again requested the copy
of the Alleged Contract and that the parties reach an amicable solution.
15. On 10 December 2024, the Player sent a letter to FECOFA requesting assistance in obtaining
a copy of the employment contract, as well as a list of official matches he had participated
in.
16. The Player informed that he remained unemployed since the alleged termination of the
Alleged Contract.
II. Proceedings before FIFA
17. On 19 December 2024, the Claimant filed the claim at hand before FIFA. A summary of the
parties’ respective positions is detailed below.
a. Position of the Claimant
18. According to the Player, on 12 September 2023 the Club issued a letter inviting him to
contract negotiations and, if possible, to sign a contract with the Club. The Player remarked
that this invitation was not for trials but specifically for negotiations. In this regard, the
Player argued that he arrived on 4 October 2023 in Congo DR to sign a contract with the
Club. The Player asserted that the parties concluded the Alleged Contract, valid from 20
October 2023 until 20 September 2024, under which he was entitled to USD 800 per month.
pg. 4
REF. FPSD-17557
The Player mentioned that the Club failed to provide him with a complete and signed copy
of the Alleged Contract.
19. In this respect, the Player alleged that he was granted a visa, played matches for the Club
and was paid USD 1,600 for October and November 2023, plus USD 200 as pocket
expenses. Furthermore, the Player stated, inter alia, that (i) he was provided with an identity
card, (ii) the Club provided him with plane tickets from Congo DR to Nigeria after the end
of the season and with accommodation, (iii) the Club obtained his ITC, (iv) conducted a
medical test, (v) and issued a release letter on 23 July 2024. Therefore, the Player argued
that there was a valid employment relationship between the parties.
20. The Player referred to the email exchanges held between the parties and pointed out the
Club’s lack of willingness to cooperate and respond to his letters. In this sense, the Player
argued that the Club chose not to contest the Player’s allegations, thereby implicitly
accepting the claims. Moreover, he referred to several pieces of evidence, such as photos
taken during matches for the Club, in order to demonstrate the employment relationship.
21. In this context, the Player asserted that the Club withheld the Alleged Contract and
fabricated a termination notice with his forged signature, even though he actively
participated in matches for the Club. The Player contended that, in fact, the Club
terminated the Contract on 23 March 2024 after having failed to pay him for over four
months, citing just cause, and provided him with the flight ticket along with a payment of
USD 1,000. Furthermore, the Player stated that he played a match on 4 January 2024 and
that he continued living in the accommodations provided by the Club until March 2024.
Therefore, the Player requested that the alleged letter be disregarded.
22. The Player further argued that the Club’s position - that he had a trial with the Club - lacks
credibility and evidence, as the Player was registered with the Club and an ITC was issued.
23. The Player argued that he is entitled to the salaries from December 2023 until September
2024, totalling USD 8,000, as well as compensation equal to USD 20,000. He also stated that
he offered several opportunities to remedy the situation, to no avail.
24. The Claimant’s requests for relief were the following:
“The CLAIMANT respectfully urges the DISPUTE RESOLUTION CHAMBER for the following
ORDERS AND ALL PAYMENTS IN USD8000 (AMERICA DOLLARS)
• AN ORDER that the RESPONDENT has unlawfully breached the contract of employment
by failing to provide the player the necessary documents to resume.
• The CLUB be ordered to pay the PLAYER his outstanding salaries for the months of
December 2023. September 2024 total USD8,000.00 plus 5% interest as from December
2023 to date of effective payment. Compensation for any damages suffered due to the
pg. 5
REF. FPSD-17557
breach of agreement (e.g., loss of potential earnings if the lack of payments affected his
ability to sign with another club).COMPENSATION FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT IN THE
AMOUNT OF USD20,000.00 plus 5% GRAND TOTAL= USD28,000.00
a. AN ORDER granting additional monetary compensation to the CLAIMANT against the
RESPONDENT.
b. According to FIFA RSTP art. 17 (3) and (4) Sporting sanctions against the club.
c. AND such other ORDERS or further ORDERS as the DISPUTE RESOLUTION CHAMBER
may deem fit to make in this circumstance.”
b. Position of the Respondent
25. Despite having been invited to do so, the Respondent failed to reply to the claim.
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
26. First of all, the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: the Chamber or the 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 17 December 2024 and submitted for decision
on 7 October 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.
27. 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), it is competent to deal with the matter at stake, which concerns an employmentrelated dispute with an international dimension between a Nigerian player and a
Congolese club.
28. 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.
pg. 6
REF. FPSD-17557
b. Burden of proof
29. 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 (hereinafter: TMS).
c. Merits of the dispute
30. 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
31. The Chamber then moved to the substance of the matter, noting that it concerned a claim
brought by a player against a club for outstanding remuneration and breach of contract.
32. The Chamber first recalled that, according to the Player, the parties concluded the Alleged
Contract, under which he was entitled to USD 800 per month from October 2023 until
September 2024. However, the Player argued that the Club withheld a copy of the
document and terminated the employment without just cause in March 2024. Therefore,
the Chamber observed that the Player requested outstanding remuneration and
compensation for breach of contract.
33. Since the Respondent did not provide its position on the claim, the Chamber acknowledged
that the decision shall be taken based on the documentation already in the file (i.e., the
statements and documents presented by the Claimant) (cf. art. 21 par. 1 of the Procedural
Rules).
34. In this context, the Chamber acknowledged that its task was to determine whether an
employment relationship existed between the parties and, if so, to assess the conditions
thereof, whether the Club terminated the employment, and the consequences arising
therefrom.
35. First, the Chamber referred to the jurisprudence of the Football Tribunal, that has
established that the actual signature of the contract is not the sole or even a necessary
element to determine whether there was an existing contractual relationship between the
pg. 7
REF. FPSD-17557
parties. Instead, the validity and the enforcement of the contract should be established on
the basis of a comprehensive understanding of all the facts and actions taken by the parties
within their context of their relationship.
36. Nonetheless, the Chamber recalled that the well-established jurisprudence has also
stipulated that the Chamber must be very careful with accepting documents other than the
employment contract duly signed by the parties, as evidence for the conclusion of a
contract.
37. Specifically, the Chamber stressed that the jurisprudence of the Football Tribunal has
mentioned that (i) the conclusion of a contract can sometimes, in very specific and limited
circumstances, be proved without a formal signature, provided that such proof meets
certain standards of confidence, and (ii) decisions determining that a contractual
relationship was formed, without having a copy of a signed contract on file, must require a
high standard of proof.
38. The Chamber also remarked that this jurisprudence is usually referred to in cases in which
the parties provide a copy of the contract, but this copy is unsigned by one of them. In this
case, however, the Chamber noted that the Player did not provide any copy of the Alleged
Contract, arguing that the Club withheld it. In this regard, the Chamber emphasized that
there was not even an unsigned copy forming the basis of the petition.
39. Thus, the Chamber considered that the burden of proof on the Player was even higher in
this case, as he was required not only to demonstrate the existence of a contractual
relationship, but also to establish that the terms and conditions of such relationship were
agreed upon as he claimed.
40. In this context, the Chamber observed that the Player provided several arguments and
pieces of evidence, which must be analysed to determine whether a contractual
relationship existed between the parties, and to determine whether it is possible to
establish the terms thereof.
41. The Chamber first noted that the Player provided a copy of his ITC, which was issued on 30
September 2023 by the NFA in favour of FECOFA. In this regard, from the information
retrieved from TMS, the Chamber could confirm that this ITC was issued and that the Player
was transferred from his previous club to the Club. However, the Chamber highlighted that,
in this transfer, it was stated that the Player would be an amateur and that he would receive
no compensation. As a consequence, the Chamber confirmed that no contract was
uploaded to TMS.
42. Then, the Chamber noted that the Player provided an identity card in which he was
identified as a player of the Club for the 2023-2024 season. Nevertheless, the Chamber
emphasized that this card included the words “football amateur”.
pg. 8
REF. FPSD-17557
43. Moreover, the Chamber acknowledged that the Player provided many pictures of him
allegedly playing for the Club along with (i) an invitation letter issued by the Club; (ii) a oneway flight ticket from Congo DR to Nigeria for 23 March 2024; (iii) a visa issued from 20
September 2023 until 19 October 2023; and (iv) a stamp on his passport made by Congo
DR’s migration office on 23 March 2024. The Chamber also wished to remark that the Player
provided a copy of a release letter issued by the Club on 23 July 2024.
44. Based on all the above, the Chamber concluded that, in the present case, a bond existed
between the parties. In the Chamber’s view, it was clear that the Player was transferred to
the Club and registered as a player for the 2023–2024 season, which aligns with the
evidence he provided showing that he travelled to Congo DR.
45. Additionally, the Chamber considered that it could be concluded that the bond ended on
23 March 2024, when the Player returned to Nigeria. Furthermore, a release letter was
issued by the Club in July 2024.
46. However, the Chamber considered that, despite this evidence, in this case it is not possible
to establish that there was an employment relationship between the parties. Based on the
evidence on file, the Chamber could conclude that the Player joined the Club as an
amateur, and he failed to provide any proof demonstrating that a contract existed, let alone
that the parties agreed upon the financial conditions he is arguing. While it is true that the
Player proved that the Club was interested in signing a contract and therefore issued the
invitation letter, the Chamber stressed that there are no further elements to determine
that the parties, in fact, concluded the contract.
47. The Chamber recalled that, in this case, the Player was required to prove both the existence
of a contractual relationship and its terms, in the absence of a copy of the Alleged Contract
and based on art. 13 par. 5 of the Procedural Rules. In this regard, the Chamber considered
that the Player failed to discharge his burden of proving the existence of this contract and
the financial conditions of the relationship, if any existed.
48. The Chamber underscored that, although the Player claimed to have received a first
payment for October and November 2023 along with pocket expenses, he did not provide
any evidence of this. Therefore, the Chamber could not conclude that the Club had a
consistent practice regarding salary payments, despite the absence of a written contract
on file.
49. In this case, the Chamber also emphasized that it is not possible to even establish that the
Player was a professional and not an amateur, considering that the evidence on file
demonstrates that he was an amateur. In this respect, there is no evidence of a written
contract or that he was paid more for his footballing activity than the expenses he
effectively incurred.
pg. 9
REF. FPSD-17557
50. In light of all the above, and in the absence of any evidence demonstrating that the parties
had a contract, the Chamber determined that it was not in a position to award outstanding
remuneration or compensation.
51. In light of all the above, the Chamber decided to reject the Player’s claim.
d. Costs
52. 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.
53. 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.
54. Lastly, the DRC concluded its deliberations by rejecting any other requests for relief made
by any of the parties.
pg. 10
REF. FPSD-17557
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Wasiu Olalekan Hamzat, is rejected.
2.
This decision is rendered without costs.
For the Football Tribunal:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
pg. 11
REF. FPSD-17557
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. 12