Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF. FPSD-17853
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 23 July 2025
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the Player Felipe
Rodriguez Chacartegui
BY:
Philippe DIALLO (France)
CLAIMANT:
Felipe Rodriguez Chacartegui, Spain
Represented by Antonio Canadas Zapata
RESPONDENT:
Beroe, Bulgaria
Represented by Juan de Dios Crespo Pérez
pg. 2
REF. FPSD-17853
I. Facts of the case
1.
On 2 September 2024, the Spanish player, Felipe Rodriguez Chacartegui (hereinafter: the
Player or the Claimant) and the Bulgarian club, Beroe (hereinafter: the Club or the
Respondent) entered into an employment contract (hereinafter: the Contract) valid as from
the date of signature until 31 May 2025.
2.
The Player was entitled to the following amounts / benefits:
3.
-
a monthly net salary of BGN 4,000 payable on the 25-day of the following month;
-
a bonus of BGN 200 per each goal or assistance in official matches payable on the 25day of the following month; and
-
a monthly housing allowance of BGN 500.
Clause 10.6 of the Contract read as follows, quoted verbatim:
“If the Player breaches the Agreement and the Club terminates the Agreement with just cause,
or if the Player terminates the Agreement without just cause, the Player must be liable of paying
to the Club a compensation equal to Euros Five Million (€5,000,000.00) net.
If the Club breaches the Agreement and the Player terminates the Agreement with just cause, or
if the Club terminates with just cause, or if the Club terminates the Agreement without just cause,
the Club must be liable of paying to the Player compensation according to Clause 17, Para. 1, of
the FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players”
4.
On 26 December 2024, the Player put the Respondent in default of BGN 14,100
corresponding to the salaries for September, October, and November 2024 in the sum of
BGN 12,000, housing allowances for the same period amounting to BGN 1,500, and goal
bonuses for three goals scored, totaling BGN 600. The Player granted the Respondent a 15day deadline to remedy the default.
5.
On 11 January 2025, the Player sent a termination notice to the Respondent mentioning
that the Respondent failed to pay his salaries.
6.
On 11 January 2025, the Club replied to the Player the following, quoted verbatim:
“We are writing in response to your correspondence dated December 26, 2024, and January 11,
2025, which requested the payment of outstanding salaries and a termination letter,
respectively.
In your January 11, 2025, message, you stated, “this is not the first time that the Club has ignored
my requests to comply with its financial obligations.” However, the attached document, marked
pg. 3
REF. FPSD-17853
as REPORT, indicates that the Club transferred BGN 3,000 to you on December 27, 2024, as
agreed between the parties.
Additionally, you were scheduled to return to Stara Zagora by plane via Alicante, and you agreed
to the Club’s itinerary by WhatsApp. Therefore, the Club remains committed to fulfilling its
financial obligations towards you. Your failure to arrive in Stara Zagora will be considered a
serious breach of good faith in the contract.
Finally, you did not terminate the contract according to FIFA RSTP. Your communication of 26th
of December requested for the payment; then we paid on the 27th, so within the minimum 15
days that article 14bis of the said RSTP requests for the payment.
So, you do not have the right to terminate your contract and your communication of January
11, 2025 is moot.
Should you decide to file a claim for breach of contract against BEROE-STARA ZAGORA with the
FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber, the Club will be compelled to file a counterclaim, asserting
that your termination was without cause.”
7.
The Respondent provided a WhatsApp communication with the Claimant without a date, in
which a flight ticket, and the letter dated 11 January 2025 was shared with the Player.
8.
On 12 February 2025, the Player concluded a new employment contract with Spanish club,
Club Atlético Antoniano, valid as from the date of signature until the last official game of
the Club for the 2024/2025 season, i.e., 30 June 2025. The Player was entitled a monthly
salary of EUR 1,000.
II. Proceedings before FIFA
9.
On 20 January 2025, the Claimant filed the claim at hand before FIFA. A summary of the
parties’ respective positions is detailed below.
a. Claim of the Claimant
10. The Player submitted that, since his arrival at the Club, he received only BGN 3,000 in total.
In light of the persistent non-payment, the Player argued that he terminated the Contract
with just cause, invoking art. 14bis of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players
(hereinafter: the Regulations).
11. The Player further stated that, as of the date of termination, the Respondent had failed to
pay the following amounts:
pg. 4
REF. FPSD-17853
-
Four monthly salary payments (September, October, November, and December 2024):
BGN 13,000 net (BGN 16,000 net Minus BGN 3,000 net received by the Player on 27
December 2024;
-
Pro-rated salary for January 2025 (11 days): BGN 1,466.66 net;
-
Four monthly housing allowances (September to December 2024): BGN 2,000 net; and
-
Pro-rated housing allowance for January 2025 (11 days): BGN 183.33 net Performance
bonus for three goals/assists: BGN 600 net.
12. The Claimant also requested a compensation of BGN 20,849.93 net corresponding to the
residual value of the Contract.
13. The Claimant requested the following relief, quoted verbatim:
“Que acepte en su totalidad la presente reclamación:
- Que se reconozca la cantidad adeudada y se ordene al Club a pagar al Jugador, referente al
contrato suscrito, la cantidad de 17.249,99 BGN NETOS.
- Que se condene al Club a abonar al Jugador un interés del 5% anual sobre las cantidades
referenciadas en párrafo previo.
- Que se reconozca la rescisión del Contrato con causa justificada, efectuada por el Jugador en
fecha 11 de enero de 2025, por reiterados impagos salariales e incumplimientos contractuales
por parte del Club.
- Que se condene al Club a abonar al Jugador una indemnización que asciende a 20.849,99 BGN
NETOS; en concepto de valor residual del contrato, como consecuencia de la referida
terminación contractual con causa justificada.
- Que se condene al Club a abonar al Jugador un interés del 5% anual sobre la cantidad
referenciada en el párrafo previo.”
Freely translated to English
“- That it accept this claim in its entirety:
- That the amount owed be recognized and that the Club be ordered to pay the Player, in relation
to the contract signed, the amount of 17,249.99 BGN NET.
- That the Club be ordered to pay the Player interest of 5% per annum on the amounts referred
to in the previous paragraph.
pg. 5
REF. FPSD-17853
- That the termination of the Contract with just cause, carried out by the Player on January 11,
2025, due to repeated non-payment of wages and breach of contract by the Club, be recognized.
- That the Club be ordered to pay the Player compensation amounting to BGN 20,849.99 NET,
as the residual value of the contract, as a result of the aforementioned termination of the
contract with just cause.
- That the Club be ordered to pay the Player interest at 5% per annum on the amount referred
to in the previous paragraph.”
b. Reply of the Respondent
14. The Respondent rejected the Claimant’s claim and filed a counterclaim.
15. The Respondent stated that it was always committed to fulfil its obligations towards the
Player, even if under financial distress. Moreover, “from the letters issued by the Club it was
evident that the Parties agreed to a payment plan convenient and acceptable for both Parties
to continue their contractual relationship reasonably”.
16. The Respondent stressed that with the correspondence’s exchanged, and the issuance of
two payments, the concept of ultima ratio was not met, especially if the payments issued
are based on a payment plan that the Parties agreed to. It also added that “while the Player
alleged that the Club did not materialize this agreement and the contractual obligations therein,
the Club issued a payment on 27 December, only 1 day after the Players first letter of notice […]
The Player was also deemed to return to training with the Club, yet failed to do so”.
17. The Respondent concluded that the termination was not “just”. Alternatively, according to
the Respondent the conditions of art 14bis of the Regulations were not fulfilled as the
default notice was upheld. The Respondent also mentioned that the Claimant had a duty
to mitigate and that he clearly and intentionally breached the duty of good faith.
18. The Respondent requested the following relief, quoted verbatim:
“a. To accept a mutually agreed upon mediation of the given case between the Parties.
b. In the alternative, to reject the Player’s claim in its entirety; and
c. That the Player pay the Club the residual amount of his contract in compensation for
terminating without just cause, in accordance with the regulations found in Article 17 of the FIFA
RSTP (see Annex No. 11: Club’s Bank Registration Form).
d. In the alternative, acknowledge and accept the bindingness of the payment plan provided by
the Club.”
19. On 2 June 2025, the FIFA general secretariat requested the Respondent to complete its
counterclaim in accordance with art. 18 of the Procedural Rules Governing the Football
Tribunal (hereinafter: the Procedural Rules).
pg. 6
REF. FPSD-17853
20. On 5 June 2025, the Respondent requested an extension to provide the requested
information. However, the Respondent failed to reply and therefore, did not complete the
counterclaim.
21. On 12 June 2025, the FIFA general secretariat informed the parties that (i) it was observed
that the Club failed to provide the information/documentation requested, and therefore,
the Club’s counterclaim was withdrawn; (ii) the investigation was closed and (iii) in
accordance with art. 23 par. 2 of the Procedural Rules, the Claimant was requested to
provide comments exclusively on the proofs of payment submitted by the Respondent.
c. Additional comments of the Claimant
22. The Claimant acknowledged that he received BGN 3,000 on 27 December 2024 and
BGN 3,000 on 5 February 2025, however mentioned that the latter payment was performed
after the filing of the claim.
23. The Claimant also mentioned that there was no agreement between the Player and the
Club regarding the payment of the salaries.
pg. 7
REF. FPSD-17853
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
24. First of all, the Single Judge of the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: the 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 20 January 2025 and submitted for
decision on 23 July 2025. Taking into account the wording of art. 31 and 34 of the January
2025 edition of the Procedural Rules, the aforementioned edition of the Procedural Rules
is applicable to the matter at hand.
25. 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 (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 Spanish player and a Bulgarian club.
26. 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. 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
27. 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
28. 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 emphasised that in the following
considerations he will refer only to the facts, arguments and documentary evidence, which
he considered pertinent for assessing the matter at hand.
pg. 8
REF. FPSD-17853
i. Main legal discussion and considerations
29. The Single Judge then moved to the substance of the matter and took note of the fact that
the parties strongly dispute justice of the termination of the Contract and its consequences.
30. The Claimant argued that he had just cause to terminate the Contract in accordance with
art. 14bis of the Regulations. The Respondent, on the other hand, contended that: (i) the
parties had agreed that the salaries in question would be paid at a later date; and (ii) the
conditions set out in art. 14bis had not been fulfilled.
31. As a preliminary remark regarding the alleged payment plan agreement referenced by the
Respondent, the Single Judge noted that the case file contained no evidence of such an
agreement, nor any indication of the Player’s acknowledgment or acceptance thereof.
Consequently, the Single Judge determined that no such agreement was concluded
between the parties, as the Respondent failed to discharge its burden of proof.
32. In this context, the Single Judge acknowledged that his task was to determine, based on
the evidence presented by the parties, whether the claimed amounts had in fact remained
unpaid by the Respondent and, if so, whether the formal pre-requisites of art. 14bis of the
Regulations had in fact been fulfilled.
33. The Single Judge then referred to the wording of art. 14bis par. 1 of the Regulations, in
accordance with which, if a club unlawfully fails to pay a player at least two monthly salaries
on their due dates, the player will be deemed to have a just cause to terminate the contract,
provided that he has put the debtor club in default in writing and has granted a deadline
of at least 15 days for the debtor club to fully comply with its financial obligations.
34. With the above in mind, the Single Judge observed that at the time correspondence dated
26 December 2024 (i.e., the default notice correspondence), the Claimant claimed not
having received his salaries for September, October, and November 2024 in the sum of
BGN 12,000, his housing allowances for the same period amounting to BGN 1,500, and
BGN 600 as bonuses for the three goals he scored, for a total of BGN 14,000 claimed.
Furthermore, the Claimant provided written evidence of having put the Respondent in
default on 26 December 2024, i.e. at least 15 days before unilaterally terminating the
Contract on 11 January 2025.
35. In the case at hand the Respondent bore the burden of proving that it indeed complied
with the financial terms of the Contract.
36. In this respect, the Respondent only provided evidence of two payments, the first of BGN
3,000 made on 27 December 2024, and the second of BGN 3,000 made on 5 February 2025.
Considering that the second payment was made after the termination of the Contract, the
Single Judge remarked that the amount mentioned in the default notice had not been fully
pg. 9
REF. FPSD-17853
paid at the time of termination. Accordingly, he confirmed that the outstanding amount
(including the housing allowance), at that moment was BGN 10,500.
37. With respect to the goal bonuses, the Single Judge acknowledged that the Claimant is
contractually entitled to such bonuses. However, he observed that no supporting evidence
was submitted. Nevertheless, based on the Club’s correspondence dated 11 January 2025
and its submissions in the present proceedings, the Respondent did not dispute the
Claimant’s entitlement to the amounts in question. Accordingly, the Single Judge concluded
that these amounts remained outstanding at the time of termination.
38. In view of all the above, the Single Judge determined that more than two salaries were
outstanding at the time of termination.
39. Thus, the Single Judge concluded that the Claimant had a just cause to unilaterally
terminate the Contract, based on art. 14bis of the Regulations.
ii. Consequences
40. 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.
41. The Single Judge noted that the outstanding remuneration at the time of the decision
amounted to BGN 12,000:
- BGN 2,500 net as remaining outstanding remuneration and BGN 500 as housing
allowance for October 2024;
- BGN 4,000 as outstanding remuneration and BGN 500 as housing allowance for
November 2024;
- BGN 4,000 as outstanding remuneration and BGN 500 as housing allowance for
December 2024; and
- BGN 600 as goal bonuses.
42. The Single Judge clarified that the above amounts took into account the payment of
BGN 3,000 made by the Club on 5 February 2025, which was deducted from the Claimant’s
outstanding remuneration.
43. As a consequence, and in accordance with the general legal principle of pacta sunt servanda,
the Single Judge decided that the Respondent was liable to pay to the Claimant the
amounts which were outstanding under the Contract at the moment of the termination,
i.e. BNG 10,500 net as outstanding remuneration; BGN 1,500 as housing allowance and
BGN 600 as goal bonuses.
pg. 10
REF. FPSD-17853
44. In addition, 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 at the rate of 5% p.a. on the outstanding amounts as follows:
-
On the amount of BGN 2,500 net as from 1 November 2024 until the date of effective
payment;
-
On the amount of BGN 500 as from 1 November 2024 until the date of effective
payment;
-
On the amount of BGN 4,000 net as from 1 December 2024 until the date of effective
payment;
-
On the amount of BGN 500 as from 1 December 2024 until the date of effective payment;
-
On the amount of BGN 4,000 net as from 1 January 2025 until the date of effective
payment;
-
On the amount of BGN 500 as from 1 January 2025 until the date of effective payment;
and
-
On the amount of BGN 600 as from 11 January 2025 until the date of effective payment.
45. Having stated the above, the Single Judge turned to the calculation of the amount of
compensation payable by the Respondent in the case at stake. In doing so, the Single Judge
firstly recapitulated that, in accordance with art. 17 par. 1 of the Regulations, the amount
of compensation shall be calculated, in particular and unless otherwise provided for in the
contract at the basis of the dispute, taking into account the damage suffered, according to
the “positive interest” principle, having regard for the individual facts and circumstances of
each case, and with due consideration for the law of the country concerned.
46. In application of the relevant provision, the Single Judge held that it first had to clarify as to
whether the pertinent employment contract contained a provision by means of which the
parties had beforehand agreed upon an amount of compensation payable by the
contractual parties in the event of breach of contract. In this regard, the Single Judge
established that clause 10 par.6 second paragraph of the Contract referred to art. 17 of the
Regulations.
47. As a consequence, the Single Judge determined that the amount of compensation payable
by the Club to the Player had to be assessed in application of the other parameters set out
in art. 17, par. 1 of the Regulations. In this respect, the Single Judge recalled that, as a
general rule, the compensation to be paid to the player by the club shall be equal to the
pg. 11
REF. FPSD-17853
residual value of the contract that was prematurely terminated, unless the Player signed a
new contract following the termination of his previous contract (cf. art. 17 par. 1 lit. i)).
48. Bearing in mind the foregoing as well as the claim of the Claimant, the Single Judge
proceeded with the calculation of the monies payable to the Claimant under the terms of
the Contract from the date of its unilateral termination until its end date. Consequently,
the Chamber concluded that the amount of BGN 22,500 serves as the basis for the
determination of the amount of compensation for breach of contract.
49. In continuation, the Single Judge verified as to whether the Claimant had signed an
employment contract with another club during the relevant period of time, by means of
which he would have been enabled to reduce his loss of income. According to the constant
practice of the Single Judge as well as art. 17 par. 1 lit. ii) of the Regulations, such
remuneration under a new employment contract shall be taken into account in the
calculation of the amount of compensation for breach of contract in connection with the
player’s general obligation to mitigate his damages.
50. Indeed, the Player found employment with Spanish club Atlético Antoniano. In accordance
with the pertinent employment contract, the Player was entitled to approximately EUR
1,000 per month. Therefore, the Single Judge concluded that the Claimant mitigated his
damages in the total amount of BGN 6,985.09 /EUR 3,571.42 (EUR 571.42 (16 days of
February) +EUR 3,000 (March, April and May)).
51. Subsequently, the Single Judge referred to art. 17 par. 1 lit. ii) of the Regulations, according
to which a player is entitled to an amount corresponding to three monthly salaries as
additional compensation should the termination of the employment contract at stake be
due to overdue payables. In the case at hand, the Single Judge confirmed that the contract
termination took place due to said reason i.e. overdue payables by the Respondent and
therefore decided that the Claimant shall receive additional compensation.
52. In this respect, the Single Judge decided to award the amount of additional compensation
of BGN 12,000, i.e. three times the monthly remuneration of the Player.
53. The Single Judge reminded the parties that, as per the last sentence of art. 17 par. 1 lit. ii)
of the Regulations, the overall compensation may never exceed the rest value of the
prematurely terminated contract.
54. Consequently, on account of all the above-mentioned considerations and the specificities
of the case at hand, the Single Judge decided that the Respondent must pay the amount of
BGN 22,500 which was to be considered a reasonable and justified amount of
compensation for breach of contract in the present matter.
55. Lastly, 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
pg. 12
REF. FPSD-17853
on said compensation at the rate of 5% p.a. as of 11 March 2025 until the date of effective
payment.
iii. Compliance with monetary decisions
56. 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 its 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.
57. 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.
58. 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.
59. 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.
60. 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
61. 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.
62. 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.
pg. 13
REF. FPSD-17853
63. Lastly, the Single Judge concluded his deliberations by rejecting any other requests for
relief made by any of the parties.
pg. 14
REF. FPSD-17853
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Felipe Rodriguez Chacartegui, is partially accepted.
2.
The Respondent, Beroe, must pay to the Claimant the following amount(s):
1. BGN 2,500 net as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1
November 2024 until the date of effective payment;
2. BGN 500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 November 2024
until the date of effective payment;
3. BGN 4,000 net as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 December
2024 until the date of effective payment;
4. BGN 500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 December 2024
until the date of effective payment;
5. BGN 4,000 net as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 January
2025 until the date of effective payment;
6. BGN 500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 January 2025
until the date of effective payment;
7. BGN 600 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 11 January 2025
until the date of effective payment;
8. BGN 22,500 as compensation for breach of contract plus 5% interest p.a. as from 11
January 2025 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, 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 of the ban shall
be of up to three entire and consecutive registration periods.
pg. 15
REF. FPSD-17853
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.
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
pg. 16
REF. FPSD-17853
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. 17