Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF. FPSD-18031
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 11 December 2025
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning
the player Cassio Francisco De Jesus
COMPOSITION:
Frans DE WEGER (The Netherlands), Chairperson
Dana MOHAMED AL-NOAIMI (Qatar), Member
Michele COLUCCI (Italy), Member
CLAIMANT:
Cassio Francisco De Jesus, Brazil
Represented by Fifpro Division Africa
RESPONDENT:
Navy, Thailand
Represented by Kanawut Saengkrajai
pg. 2
REF. FPSD-18031
I. Facts of the case
1.
On 18 June 2024, the Brazilian player Cassio Francisco De Jesus (hereinafter: the Player) and
the Thai club Navy (hereinafter: the Club) signed a document (hereinafter: the Offer), which
established the following:
“[The Club] wish to sign a professional football agreement with Mr. Cassio Francisco De
Jesus (hereinafter referred to as the player) in the following conditions:
1. Term of contract
From 1st July 2024 until the end of the Thai League 3 2024/2025 seasons or the end of
tournament that the club is still participating in 2024/2025 seasons
2. Basic Remuneration
75,000 THB per month (net) without tax
3. Winning Bonus
Bonus around 1,000 THB per match
Bonus for Promotion to T2
if the club promotes to T2, [the Club] will provide 75,000 THB
4. Accommodation
[The Club] will provide 5,000 THB per month.
5. Vehicle
[The Club] will provide 5,000 THB per month for rental motorcycle/car
6. Visa and Work permit
[The Club] will provide a visa and work permit for a season.
7. Ticket
[The Club] will provide a ticket round trip (Brazil to Thailand and Thailand to Brazil)
8. Sign Fee
[The Club] will provide 20.000 THB
9. Medical examination
The club and the player will enter only into agreement if the player passes all relevant
medical examinations by the doctors or club physical therapist appointed by [the Club].
10. Other key terms in contract
The club and the player will negotiate other key terms in the contract further.”
pg. 3
REF. FPSD-18031
2.
On 5 July 2024, the same parties concluded an employment contract (hereinafter: the
Contract), valid as from the date of signature until the conclusion of the Thai League 3 2024–
2025 season or the completion of the tournament in which the Club was participating
during the 2024–2025 season.
3.
Clause 2 of the Contract established:
“2. Compensation
2.1. The [Player] shall receive a monthly salary of 75,000 Thai Baht (Seventy-five
thousand Thai Baht) (Hereinafter referred to as the ‘Monthly Salary’), via bank transfer
and merely to the [Player]’s bank account. The [Player] is required to provide a copy of
his bank account book to the Club within 5 (five) days from the date of signing this
Agreement. The Club shall withhold and deduct from the Monthly Salary any applicable
taxes in accordance with the relevant laws.
The Monthly Salary shall be divided into two parts: one part, equivalent to fifty percent
(50%), shall constitute the base salary (Hereinafter referred to as the ‘Base Salary’), while
the remaining portion shall serve as an allowance allocated for the [Player]'s training
(Hereinafter referred to as the ‘Allowance’). Subject to the best effort of the [Player],
should the coach or the Club has reasonable grounds to believe that the [Player] is not
performing his duties in good faith—including but not limited to, frequent absences from
training sessions, injury without medical certificates from a Club-recognized physician
— or the [Player] commits any actions as outlined in clause 3.2, the Club reserves the
right to adjust the payment of the Base Salary as it deems appropriate from time to time.
The exercise of such right by the Club does not constitute a waiver of its right to seek
compensation for any further damages incurred.
The Allowance will be computed based on the daily training duration stipulated by the
Club. Full payment of the Allowance shall be granted if the [Player] completes the
prescribed training duration. However, any absence from training sessions shall result
in a daily deduction from this Allowance.
The Employer reserves the right to deduct withholding tax according to law.
2.2. If the Club team secures promotion to T2, the [Player] shall be entitled to a bonus
equivalent to one month of Monthly Salary (75,000 Thai Baht). Additionally, for each
match won by the Club team, a bonus of 1,000 Thai Baht shall be awarded. Moreover,
the [Player] shall receive a personal bonus, the terms of which shall be determined by
conditions specified by the Club.
2.3. The Club shall be responsible for obtaining the necessary work visa and work permit
for the [Player] for the duration of the season, at the Club’s own cost. The [Player] shall
pg. 4
REF. FPSD-18031
cooperate fully with the Club in providing any required documentation or information
necessary for the visa and work permit application process.
2.4. The Club shall provide 5,000 Thai Baht (Five thousand Thai Baht) per month for
accommodation expenses.
2.5. Upon entering into this agreement, the Club shall pay a sign-on fee of 20,000 Thai
Baht (Twenty thousand Thai Baht) to the [Player]. The payment shall be made via bank
transfer directly to the [Player]’s bank account.
2.6. The Club shall not be responsible for any injury, accident, or medical treatment
expenses incurred by the [Player] that occur outside of matches, football competition
hours, or training sessions. This includes, but is not limited to, injuries resulting from the
[Player]’s actions that are not undertaken under the express orders of the Club.
2.7. The [Player] shall be solely responsible in all cases for injury, accident, medical
treatment, and fines for yellow cards and red cards due to fights, or foul play in football
matches, caused by the contractor, even if they occur during the matches and off field
behavior. However, yellow cards resulting from off-field behavior shall be considered by
the Club on a case by-case basis or decided from time to time regarding the [Player’s]
responsibility for injury, accident, medical treatment, and fines.
2.8 Decisions made by the Discipline and Ethics Committee of the [Club] regarding any
disciplinary matters under Clauses 2.6 and 2.7 shall be final and binding.”
4.
Clause 4 of the Contract stipulated:
“4. Responsibilities of the [Club]
4.1. The [Club] commits to remunerating the [Player] in accordance with the
compensation terms outlined in this Agreement, ensuring prompt and accurate
payments.
4.2. The [Club] is obligated to provide the [Player] with fair and ethical treatment,
extending the same considerations as would be afforded to a permanent employee of
the Club.
4.3. The [Club] shall provide one motorcycle for the [Player] use, with the [Player] being
responsible for all associated costs including fuel expenses.
4.4.The [Club] shall provide and purchase a flight ticket for the [Player], covering travel
from Thailand back to Brazil at the conclusion of the Agreement. Optional service level
of the ticket shall be at the Club’s discretion.”
pg. 5
REF. FPSD-18031
5.
Clause 6 of the Contract provided as follows:
“6. Conduct of [Player] and Penalties
6.1. In the event that the [Player] commits a breach or fails to perform duties properly
and completely as stipulated in clause 3, the [Club] reserves the right to impose penalties
on the [Player] as per the regulations set forth by the [Club], and may terminate the
Agreement immediately in cases of severe misconduct resulting in damages to the Club.
6.2. In the case of injury resulting from accidents as per clause 2.7 to the extent that the
[Player] is unable to compete, causing damages to the Club, the Club has the right to
reduce the [Player] ’s Monthly Salary by 70% of Monthly Salary until the [Player] has fully
recovered and is able to compete again.
6.3. In cases where the [Player] commits a breach as per clause 6.1 and the [Club] fairly
deems it severe, the Employer has the right to instruct the [Player] to cease duties while
paying only half of the Monthly Salary until the situation is resolved.”
6.
Clause 8 of the Contract set forth:
“8. Termination of Agreement
8.1. This Agreement shall not remain in force after the expiration date unless renewed.
8.2. Either party may agree to terminate this Agreement before its expiration. In such
cases, the [Club] shall pay the [Player] a compensation equivalent to one month of
Monthly Salary as per clause 2.1.
8.3. This Agreement may be terminated by the [Club] after notice of not less than 1
month, in cases where the [Player] violates any Agreement, or in the following
circumstances:
1. The [Player] commits severe misconduct as per clause 6.
2. The [Player] becomes unable to perform their duties due to a breach as per clause 3,
where they are prohibited from competing for more than 2 months.
3. The [Player] may terminate this Agreement after giving written notice of not less than
1 month to the [Club], in cases where the [Club] fails to pay the [Player]’s compensation
continuously for 2 months according to the agreed schedule.”
7.
On 30 October 2024, the Player sent several images to a Club representative via the
application Line, showing that he appeared to be injured.
pg. 6
REF. FPSD-18031
8.
9.
On 4 November 2024, the Player and an unidentified person had the following
conversation (quoted verbatim):
Unidentified person:
“No problem”
Player:
“Without my family here, sometimes I need time for some things
It’s been really hard for me to stay away… ten”
Unidentified person:
“Got your point”
Player:
“4 months away already...
sometimes it won’t be possible to follow the program
If this isn’t good for the club, no problem... we’ll agree on
something and resolve it
because I know the club also has its own schedule
after the November games we talked about my situation
Talk to all maybe I have to back my country”
On 24 November 2024, the Player sent an unidentified person the following messages
(quoted verbatim):
“Bro how are you?
Good morning!
I need you speak to all coaches and navy bosses
I have to back my country
Said them I need only to weeks to see my family and after I comback
here again
The tickets to come Thailand again I will buy
Please
10 December i comeback again here”
10. On an unspecified date, the Player informed an unidentified person who, according to the
Club, was his agent, that he had spoken with the coaches, and they had said he could go to
Brazil after the game on 8 December 2024, so that the Club could book him a ticket for 9
or 10 December 2024.
11. Also on an unspecified date, the Player informed an unidentified person who, according to
the Club, was his agent, that he did not feel well and had to have his body checked. He also
mentioned that his doctor in Brazil told him to return to Brazil as soon as possible, and he
sent several pictures of his body.
12. Also on an unspecified date, the Player reported to an unidentified person that he was in
a clinic, that he would have his blood checked, and would receive blood.
pg. 7
REF. FPSD-18031
13. On 26 November 2024, the Sirikit Hospital, Royal Thai Navy, issued a notification of medical
expenses for a total amount of THB 3,150. It appears that the invoice was for the cost of
transporting a nurse to Chonburi Hospital.
14. Also on 26 November 2024, the Sirikit Hospital issued an itemised bill concerning the
Player’s treatment between 25 and 26 November 2024. The total amount indicated in the
statement was THB 10,643 and covered accommodation and meals, medication, blood
transfusion services and blood components, laboratory tests and pathology, nursing
services, and other hospital charges.
15. Also on 26 November 2024, the Club posted on its Facebook page that the Player was in
need of blood and requested that fans donate blood at the Sirikit Hospital.
16. Also on 26 November 2024, a flight ticket was issued by the Club for Ms. Karla Patricia
Antunes de Jesus, the Player’s wife (hereinafter: Ms. Antunes de Jesus), to fly on that day from
São Paulo (Brazil) to Bangkok (Thailand) with a stopover in Doha (Qatar).
17. Between 26 and 28 November 2024, an unidentified institution charged expenses to the
Player for a total amount of THB 20,789. The expenses included drug prices, blood
examination, pathology examination, hematologic, biochemistry and metallurgy tests,
medical equipment and tool costs, and clinic examination fees.
18. On an unspecified date, the Player and an unspecified person had the following
conversation (quoted verbatim):
Unidentified person:
“After we’ve discussed with doctor, your condition is serious. You
have pancytopenia which means your red blood cells, white
blood cells and platelets are low. The doctor have to identify
cause of the condition which include bone marrow biopsy. They
will injecting needle to aspirate your bone marrow content from
your bone usually from your hip. You must have to cover all cost
of this treatment by yourself and if you want your family to be
here with you those airplane cost are included by yourself.
club say”
Player:
“No problem
Just them pay salary
They pay my salaries I can do everything”
19. On 29 November 2024, an unidentified person informed Ms. Antunes de Jesus that the
Player would soon be transferred to Siriraj Hospital.
pg. 8
REF. FPSD-18031
20. On 7 December 2024, an individual named Mr. Chaipanha issued a summary of medical
expenses to the Player for his treatment between 26 November and 7 December 2024. The
total amount of the expenses was THB 57,428 and related to accommodation, nutrition,
blood and medical examination costs, radiology diagnostics, cost of equipment and tools,
and nursing fees. It was stated that THB 33,289 had been paid, leaving a balance of THB
24,139.
21. Also on 7 December 2024, Chonburi Hospital issued a receipt to the Player for THB 24,139,
corresponding to the aforementioned balance.
22. Also on 7 December 2024, the Siriraj Hospital issued a “patient referral form for
admittance”. The Siriraj Hospital also issued a deposit receipt stating that it received a
deposit of THB 300,000 for medical expenses for “sleeping in the hospital”.
23. Also on 7 December 2024, the Club addressed the following letter to the Player (quoted
verbatim):
“On behalf of Navy Football Club ("We"), We have heard that your absence for personal
matter which now facing with difficulties situation. We would like to invite you to explore
viable solution for both parties in good faith. Please kindly make an appointment with
The Manager of the Navy Football Club; Rear Admiral Asoke Srisawad as assigned
person for this appointment by 10 December 2024. If you are not convenient to be in
person at the club, please kindly reply to this letter for update situation and tentative
schedule to be back for training. Kindly submit letter via Thailand post to below address
and ensure that it shall be reached by 12 December 2024.”
24. On an unspecified date, a doctor named Apichanya Rattanasuk from Chonburi Hospital
indicated that the Player had aplastic anemia and atrophy of the bone marrow. In this
regard, he stated that the Player had been hospitalized from 26 November to 7 December
2024 and then transferred to Siriraj Hospital for further treatment. The doctor further
stated that the Player should avoid contact sports or high-contact activities.
25. On 8 December 2024, the Player replied to the Club’s letter, stating that a face-to-face
meeting was impossible due to his severe illness and that the only option was to
communicate via email or WhatsApp. In addition, he argued that the Club, already aware
of the severity of his illness, did not provide any support with medical costs, and he had to
bear all expenses. He also mentioned that there was no condition whatsoever for him to
return to training and that he was restricted to visits due to the treatment and low
immunity.
26. On 10 December 2024, the Club addressed the following letter to the Player (quoted
verbatim):
pg. 9
REF. FPSD-18031
“Refer to attached email and medical certificate which you have provided to Navy
Football Club ("We") to inform that you severity of illness and could not participate in
person meeting at the club in Chonburi.
First of all, We are deeply sympathetic for your illness and hope you will be in good
condition soon.
Moreover, We would like to explain clearly how we have expressed our concerns as
following detail:
• At the beginning, when you have informed that you need to go to hospital, We have
promptly supported to accommodate you to Somdech Phra Nangchao Sirikit Hospital
and examined properly.
• After consulted with Doctor and required the blood group O negative, we have
supported to promoted on NAVY FC Fan page and also among our Navy Staffs to donate
on it This still continues even though you have been transferred to Chonburi Hospital
and Siriraj Hospital as consequently.
• During we have asked for blood donation, we had a chance to discuss with doctor
which can support to transfer you to Siriraj Hospital. It was the good benefit for you and
promptly inform you for this opportunity.
• We accommodated as requested to purchase air ticket for your wife to be here to
support you in difficulties situation.
• We have arranged campaign to bid your match worn jersey to get donation to support
you.
• We remain committed to assist you with any additional requirements as specified in
the Agreement or allowed circumstances.
As you perceived that we are under Royal Thai Navy so we need to carefully find solution
to support you which refer to Agreement. It has been mentioned that We will be
responsible for any injury, accident, or medical treatment expenses incurred to you that
occur during matches, football competition hours, or training sessions. However for your
provided supported medical certificate, it seems happened outside matches, football
competition hours, or training sessions.
For reason above, We would like you to discuss in good faith to support your difficulties
so we propose to arrange discussion at the hospital if it allows to do to support as much
as We can.”
27. On 11 December 2024, the Club sent the Player a document referred to as the “Player
Withdrawal Form”, by means of which the Club would withdraw him from the competition,
accompanied by the following email:
“According to Article 29.8 of referred Regulations which has allowed club under Thai
League 3 to adjust the list of player within permitted time, Navy Football Club ("We") have
pg. 10
REF. FPSD-18031
considered carefully with your supported email and medical certificate which you have
provided to us. During you are under medical treatment which cannot mention specific
period for treatment and both parties still under Agreement negotiation.
We would like you to consider to sign on attached Form to submit to Thai League as per
Regulation and kindly revert by 13 December 2024 via email or via your Agent to
coordinate.
For negotiation of Agreement, please feel free to inform when you are in good condition
to arrange.
On behalf of the Club, may the good wishes and warm thoughts of us to send a little
cheerfulness into your world and help you feel better soon.”
28. On 11 December 2024, the Player sent the following response:
“Good evening!
First of all, I want to say that I have no contractual relationship with the agent Mr.
Marcita Supachoke, and in order to reach an agreement, Club Navy FC can send an
email, speaking directly by email or as was informed by phone.
And according to the attached photo of my contract, the salary should be paid in full
without fees, but until now, fees have always been charged since the beginning of the
contract. And add 5,000 baht for housing and another 5,000 baht for a vehicle...
I am in conversation with my lawyer about the issue of medical costs, which I am almost
100% sure that the club should provide support under the standard FIFA contract for a
foreign player outside his country... I will not sign any document before the full salaries
are paid with corrected values, even those that have already been paid with fees. As soon
as I have a response from my lawyer, we can schedule an online meeting... and once
again I ask that there is no need for negotiations through the Agent mentioned here
because I have no contractual relationship with him... negotiations will now only be
made between (player and his lawyer - Navy FC) Thank you very much.”
29. On an unspecified date, an unidentified person sent the Player a “Player Withdrawal Form”.
The Player stated that he would not sign anything without receiving payment of “all his
money”, because, after that, if they did not want to pay, they would not do it.
30. On 18 December 2024, the Club terminated the Contract by means of the following letter
(hereinafter: the Termination Letter):
“As you have agreed to the contract of hiring of professional football players with the
Navy Football Club on July 5, 2024, with a period of time from the date of the contract
(July 5, 2024) until the end of the 2024-2025 season according to the Thai League 3
football competition calendar for 2024-2025, with a salary of 75,000 baht per month,
divided into a basic salary that must be paid every month of 37,500 baht and an amount
pg. 11
REF. FPSD-18031
of 37,500 baht as a training allowance that must be paid to the football players in full
according to the days and times of training following the club’s training calendar. If the
football players miss training or do not come to practice with the team as scheduled by
the club, the club will deduct the daily allowance and calculate the payment to the
football players as detailed in the professional football player employment contract.
Later, on November 25, 2024, Mr. Cassio Francisco De Jesus was admitted to Chonburi
Hospital, and since then was unable to train with the club. The club later learned that
Mr, Cassio Francisco De Jesus suffered from APLASTIC ANEMIA (bone marrow atrophy),
which was not caused by playing football for the club in any way, It was caused by genetic
diseases (inherited or congenital causes) or acquired causes unrelated to playing football
for the club, and Mr. Cassio Francisco De Jesus did not inform the club before signing the
professional football player employment contract. Therefore, it is considered that you
intentionally concealed the facts about your chronic disease that you were well aware
of, but did not disclose the facts to the club, causing the club to believe that you were in
good health and able to participate in professional football league competitions with the
club and signed a football player contract with you to participate in the Thai League 3
football competition, season 2024-2025. You must, therefore, be responsible for the
medical expenses arising from the said disease yourself.
For the above reasons, the Navy Football Club would like to inform you that your football
player employment contract would be terminated, because the aplastic anemia (bone
marrow atrophy) disease has definitely made you unable to work with the club, and may
be of life-threatening. However, for the benefit of humanity, the club is pleased to pay
you the basic salary according to the prafessional athlete employment contract in
December 2024 in the amount of 37,500 baht and the compensation for termination of
the contract for 1 month (January 2025) in the amount 37,500. baht, totaling 75,000
baht, and because you did not attend the training as scheduled by the club in December
2024 and January 2024, the club cannot calculate the training allowance to you.
Finally, the club wishes you a speedy recovery from the disease and a speedy return to
your normal life.
P.S. please contact us to receive the compensation from the legal representative, Mr.
Kanawut Saengkrajai Law Firm (…)”
31. On 23 December 2024, a flight ticket was issued by the Player to fly on 24 December 2024
from Bangkok (Thailand) to São Paulo (Brazil) with a stopover in Rome (Italy). The Player
paid EUR 2,557.91 for the ticket.
32. On 24 December 2024, the Player replied to the Termination Letter, acknowledging its
receipt and stating that he was shocked by the Club’s decision at a time when he was going
through the most difficult period of his career due to the diagnosis of a severe illness. The
Player argued that this was not the expected behaviour from a professional club and
pg. 12
REF. FPSD-18031
expressed that he was appalled by the Club’s suggestion that he had intentionally
concealed his disease, which he argued was discovered after the signature of the Contract.
The Player further argued that he considered the Club had terminated the Contract without
just cause and that he was entitled to damages, including but not limited to compensation
for breach of contract and reimbursement of medical expenses. The Player requested that
the Club inform him within seven days whether it acknowledged liability and was willing to
compensate the damage.
33. On 8 January 2025, the Club replied to the Player’s letter, stating that, while it had always
prioritized the safety and well-being of its players, the Player’s medical condition stemmed
from a chronic illness and was not an injury sustained during a match or training.
Therefore, the Club alleged that it was not liable to cover the requested damages or
medical expenses; however, it had nevertheless decided to pay him THB 75,000, including
his salary for December 2024 and compensation for the termination for one month. Lastly,
the Club wished the Player a full recovery and expressed its gratitude for his dedication.
34. On 31 January 2025, the Player lodged the present claim, the contents of which is detailed
in continuation.
35. On 4 March 2025, the Player passed away.
36. On 29 March 2025, the Club played its last match of the national league.
II. Proceedings before FIFA
37. On 31 January 2025, the Player filed the claim at hand before FIFA. A summary of the
parties’ respective positions is detailed below.
a. Claim of the Player
38. The Player stated that the parties concluded the Contract, which was valid for the
2024/2025 season and would end on 31 May 2025. According to the Player, under the
Contract he was entitled to a sign-on fee of THB 20,000, a monthly salary of THB 75,000,
and a monthly fee of THB 5,000 for accommodation expenses. Additionally, the Player
argued that he was entitled to a THB 1,000 bonus per win, a motorcycle (the cost of which
was set at THB 5,000 per month), and a flight ticket for his return to Brazil.
39. The Player alleged that by the end of October 2024, he started noticing red spots on his
skin and in November 2024 he began to feel very tired, although he continued working for
the Club. However, he argued that on 25 November 2024 he sought medical advice and
was diagnosed with aplastic anemia, a very severe blood disease requiring urgent medical
treatment.
pg. 13
REF. FPSD-18031
40. The Player alleged that on 7 December 2024, when he was hospitalized, the Club sent him
a letter asking for a “viable solution for both parties” and requested an appointment by 12
December 2024, which was not possible due to his condition. The same occurred on 10
December 2024, when the Club outlined its support and indicated that it had purchased
an air ticket for his wife, while again requesting a “solution”, and with the letter dated 11
December 2024.
41. In this context, the Player contended that the Club terminated the Contract on 18
December 2024, indicating it would pay half the amount of the salaries for December 2024
and January 2025. The Player indicated that he challenged the termination and requested
the Club to acknowledge liability, which the Club denied on 8 January 2025.
42. Based on the above, the Player argued that the Club terminated the Contract without just
cause, as (i) the Player did not conceal any illness from the Club and (ii) a contract cannot
be terminated due to an illness.
43. According to the Player, the Contract did not grant the Club a right to prematurely
terminate the Contract for illness or injury, and the argument of the Club that the Player
concealed the illness is appalling, incorrect, and without any evidence. The Player stated
that he needed immediate medical treatment and, after the diagnosis, was instantly
hospitalized in Thailand. He argued that this disease, without treatment, was lifethreatening and that it would not make any sense for him to conceal the illness to sign a
contract, play football, and then go to a hospital to be diagnosed. The Player pointed out
that the termination was also made at the most vulnerable point of his life.
44. In any event, the Player stated that even if he had concealed the illness, the Regulations on
the Status and Transfer of Players (hereinafter: the Regulations) state that a contract cannot
be made subject to a positive medical test. In this respect, this could only mean that the
Club failed to conduct a proper medical examination and cannot now retroactively invoke
this.
45. In this respect, the Player stated that he is entitled to the full salary for December 2024, as
well as the accommodation fee, and argued that the separation of the salary between a
base salary and the “allowance” cannot be considered legitimate, as his monthly salary was
THB 75,000. The Player also contended that the “allowance” part was clearly subjective and
could lead to an abusive situation if the Club decided to unilaterally reduce his monthly
salary. Hence, he requested that FIFA confirm that his monthly salary was THB 75,000.
46. In addition, the Player alleged that he was entitled to four “win bonuses“ and
reimbursement of his flight ticket in the amount of THB 76,190. Moreover, the Player stated
that, in the absence of any insurance taken out by the Club, the Club was also responsible
for the reimbursement of his medical expenses totalling THB 392,019.
pg. 14
REF. FPSD-18031
47. The Player also mentioned that he was entitled to THB 425,000 as compensation for breach
of contract and THB 450,000 in moral damages.
48. The Player’s requests for relief were the following:
“The Player is requesting the FIFA DRC to determine that the Club terminated the
employment relationship without just cause on 18 December 2024 and to order the Club
to pay him the following amounts:
THB 80,000 as outstanding salaries + 5% interest as from 1 January 2025 until the date
of effective payment.
THB 4,000 as outstanding win bonuses + 5% interest as from the dates of the matches
until the date of effective payment.
THB 76,190 as the reimbursement of a flight ticket + 5% interest as from 24 December
2024 until the date of effective payment.
THB 392,019 as the reimbursement for medical expenses + 5% interest as from the dates
of payments until the date of effective payment.
THB 425,000 as the amount due as compensation for breach of contract + 5% interest
as from 18 December 2024 until the date of effective payment.
THB 450,000 as the amount due as moral damages + 5% interest as from 18 December
2024 until the date of effective payment.
In addition, the Player is requesting the FIFA DRC to impose sporting sanctions on the
Club for breach of contract, for the latter’s breach of contract within the protected
period.”
b. Reply of the Club
49. On 5 March 2025, the Club submitted its reply to the Player’s claim, stating that it had
always complied with the terms of the Contract. According to the Club, on 30 October 2024
the Player reported to the Club’s employee only that he had been assaulted by an opposing
player, without providing any information about symptoms of red spots or any illness as
he later claimed.
50. The Club also indicated that on 21 November 2024, the Player sent a message to his agent
informing him that he wanted to return to Brazil, and on 24 November 2024 he informed
that he wanted to make an appointment with the president and the coach to discuss his
trip to visit his family. This meeting was scheduled for 25 November 2024, and both parties
agreed that he would visit Brazil after 9 December 2024. On the same day, the Club argued
pg. 15
REF. FPSD-18031
that the Player informed his agent that he had to return to Brazil immediately because he
did not feel well and needed a medical check-up.
51. According to the Club, the Player’s agent forwarded pictures of the Player’s updated
symptoms, and the Club informed its doctor and transferred him to the closest hospital.
The Club alleged that it had carefully considered the symptoms and illness and decided
that the Player should receive medical treatment and stop performing both training and
competition. The Club also asserted that, since the Player needed an urgent blood
transfusion, it took action to promote and coordinate support for the Player via the Club’s
Facebook page.
52. The Club stated that it supported the Player by coordinating with a hospital and facilitating
the arrangement of an ambulance, but, due to the obligation under the Contract regarding
personal illness, he was responsible for himself. In any case, the Club mentioned that it had
made payments in advance to help the Player receive treatment. The Club contended that
it facilitated the air ticket for his wife and that on 27 November 2024 the Player deleted his
Line account, making the Club unable to contact him as usual.
53. According to the Club, on 7 December 2024 the Player was transferred to a top medical
facility in Thailand, and the Club coordinated and facilitated the availability of a room and
an ambulance, including the cost of the ambulance. However, the Club argued that the
Player requested a payment of THB 300,000 and threatened to sue the Club at FIFA if it did
not pay. Since the Club could not accommodate this amount, it tried to negotiate a joint
solution in good faith but received a reply from the Player stating that the Club did not
provide any financial assistance or support.
54. Moreover, the Club mentioned that it needed to withdraw the Player from the tournament
due to serious illness, to avoid internal audit or auditing from other parties that the Club
had ignored or failed to act in the best interest of the entity, as only three foreign players
can be registered and allocated. The Club informed that the Contract would still be valid,
but the Player refused to sign unless the Club paid him the money he requested.
55. The Club stated that on 18 December 2024, its board discussed the Player’s illness and
decided to follow the doctor’s advice regarding contact sports. Considering that the Club
faced difficulties as it could not change the foreign player quota because the Player did not
cooperate to sign the withdrawal form, the Club mentioned that it carefully considered its
obligations and the Contract and terminated the Contract, paying the current salary and
compensation for one month, depositing it as security at the Club’s lawyer’s office. The Club
further stated that on 24 December 2024 the Player was discharged from the hospital and
travelled back to Brazil without informing the Club.
56. In this context, the Club alleged that it tried to provide the best assistance to the Player,
but his disease was not caused by training or competition but was a chronic condition.
Therefore, the Club was not responsible for the Player’s medical expenses, even when he
pg. 16
REF. FPSD-18031
tried to force the Club to pay them. The Club emphasized that it attempted to negotiate
and resolve the dispute considering morality, humanity, and compliance with the rules of
the Thai League.
57. Regarding the Player’s financial claim, the Club argued the following:
•
Regarding the outstanding salaries, the Club acknowledged an obligation to pay THB
75,000 for salary and contract termination fee but denied any responsibility for the
damages claimed by the Player. The Club mentioned that the Player owed money to
the Club for his wife’s flight ticket.
•
Regarding the bonus, the Club stated that the Contract provided for a bonus payment
under conditions determined by the Club, which were playing or participating in
matches. Since the Player was under treatment, he did not meet the conditions to
receive the bonus.
•
Regarding the flight ticket, the Club mentioned that the Player returned to Brazil at his
own discretion, without informing the Club, and the flight occurred after the
termination of the Contract.
•
Regarding medical expenses, the Club stated that the Contract did not specify that the
Club must be responsible for medical expenses resulting from the Player’s chronic
disease.
•
Regarding compensation for breach of contract, the Club alleged that it could not have
known of this disease after a regular medical test, as aplastic anemia can only be
investigated or examined by bone marrow aspiration, which is beyond a normal
medical check-up for players. In this regard, the Club stated that it tried to reach an
amicable settlement, which was not possible, and argued that if the Player did not know
this symptom before, why could he contact his personal doctor immediately when he
noticed the symptoms instead of receiving treatment in Thailand. The Club asserted
that it needed to terminate the Contract in order to continue to use the rights of the
foreign athlete quota and stated that, in any event, the calculation is incorrect as the
Thai League 3 season ended on 29 March 2025 and not 31 May 2025.
•
Regarding the moral damages, the Club argued that it had paid for his medical
expenses in advance and provided assistance to the Player, such as booking flight
tickets for his wife and gathering people to donate blood. Hence, the Club argued that
it was not be liable for the damages, rather than to pay THB 75,000.
58. In light of all the above, the Club contended that it was not responsible for all damages as
claimed by the Player.
pg. 17
REF. FPSD-18031
c. Replica of the Player
59. In the replica filed on 13 March 2025, the Player’s legal representative informed the FIFA
General Secretariat that the Player had passed away on 5 (sic) March 2025 as a result of his
illness. In this context, it was stated that the claim would be continued by his wife, Ms.
Antunes de Jesus, who was the Player’s heir, and that the marriage certificate and a new
power of attorney were provided.
60. Regarding the Club’s response, Ms. Antunes de Jesus underlined that the Club’s position
was rejected, and the Player’s position was reiterated in full. In particular, Ms. Antunes de
Jesus mentioned that the first time the Club visited the Player in the hospital, it already
brought up the termination of the Contract, and that it was not an appropriate or valid
stance for the Club to pressure a hospitalized player to accept deductions from his salaries
and/or force him to waive certain rights.
61. Ms. Antunes de Jesus also stated that the Player was never provided with the option of
being deregistered while maintaining all the terms and conditions of the Contract, as the
Club simply wanted to terminate the Contract. Moreover, Ms. Antunes de Jesus indicated
that the letter sent on 17 (sic) December 2024 did not have a clear explanation of what was
expected from the Player and what the Club meant with the phrase “withdraw player from
competition with contract”, which is why the Player would not sign any documents without
being aware of what that would mean for his legal position. Ms. Antunes de Jesus argued
that the Player had already expressed his discontent with the Club’s actions and, when he
wanted to have his contract respected and receive all payments if the Club wanted to
terminate the Contract, the Club decided to terminate it.
62. Ms. Antunes de Jesus reiterated that the Club must pay compensation, reimbursement for
medical expenses, moral damages, and outstanding salaries. Regarding the THB 80,000 for
December, Ms. Antunes de Jesus alleged that the Player worked for most of December
2024 and no deductions can be made as they were never voluntarily agreed. Regarding the
bonuses, Ms. Antunes de Jesus asserted that the Contract did not specify that the Player
had to take part in the matches to be entitled to the bonuses. Regarding the flight ticket, it
was mentioned that the fact that the flight was booked after the termination cannot be
used to avoid payment of the contractual obligation. Regarding the reimbursement for
medical expenses, Ms. Antunes de Jesus asserted that they were due based on FIFA
jurisprudence. Regarding compensation for breach of contract, Ms. Antunes de Jesus
affirmed that a club cannot terminate a contract for injury or illness, not even if the illness
or injury is not the result of playing football. Additionally, Ms. Antunes de Jesus indicated
that the season in Thailand ended on 31 May 2025. Lastly, regarding the moral damages,
the request was reiterated in full given the appalling statements made by the Club.
pg. 18
REF. FPSD-18031
d. Additional information and documentation requested by the FIFA General
Secretariat
63. On 2 April 2025, Ms. Antunes de Jesus submitted an unsolicited correspondence, wishing
to amend the claim. In this sense, Ms. Antunes de Jesus alleged that on 29 March 2025, the
Club won the championship and secured promotion to the Thai League 2. Ms. Antunes de
Jesus alleged that clause 2.2 of the Contract stipulated that the Player would be entitled to
a bonus payment of THB 75,000 in case the Club secured promotion. Therefore, she
mentioned that she wished to amend the claim and add a request for the payment of THB
75,000 plus 5% interest p.a. as from 30 March 2025.
64. On 14 April 2025, the FIFA General Secretariat acknowledged receipt of the
correspondences and informed Ms. Antunes de Jesus that, based on art. 11 par. 4 of the
Procedural Rules Governing the Football Tribunal (hereinafter: the Procedural Rules), it
would be up to the Chamber to accept or reject the correspondence dated 2 April 2025.
65. Also on 14 April 2025, the FIFA General Secretariat took note that the Player had passed
away and that Ms. Antunes de Jesus, who claimed to be the Player’s heir, intended to
pursue the present claim. In this regard, the FIFA General Secretariat informed Ms. Antunes
de Jesus that she did not appear to have standing to sue. In this context, and in order to
proceed with the claim, the FIFA General Secretariat granted her until 4 May 2025 to
provide any documentary evidence supporting the confirmation of the assignment of
rights and the Player’s legal succession, for the Football Tribunal’s consideration.
66. On 30 April 2025, Ms. Antunes de Jesus requested a temporary suspension of the deadline
to provide the relevant information/documentation, as the documents had to be issued by
the relevant national authorities and would not be delivered before the stated deadline.
67. On 2 May 2025, the FIFA General Secretariat, based on the exceptional circumstances and
the impact that the requested documents might have on the resolution of the case,
suspended the time limit and urged the Claimant to submit all the requested documents
as soon as they became available.
68. On 14 July 2025, Ms. Antunes de Jesus provided the following documents:
• The marriage certificate;
• The death certificate;
• The birth certificate of Alice Antunes de Jesus, daughter of Ms. Antunes de Jesus and
the Player;
• The birth certificate of Lucas Antunes de Jesus, son of Ms. Antunes de Jesus and the
Player;
• The birth certificate of Maria Laura Munaretti Oliveira de Jesus, daughter of the Player;
• School certificates of Alice and Lucas Antunes de Jesus.
pg. 19
REF. FPSD-18031
69. In this regard, Ms. Antunes de Jesus argued that it was sufficiently proven that she was the
heir to the Player and had standing to continue the claim against the Club.
70. On 26 August 2025, the FIFA General Secretariat acknowledged receipt of the documents
and stated that they appeared insufficient to support the confirmation of the assignment
of rights and the Player’s legal succession. Therefore, the FIFA General Secretariat granted
a final deadline to provide further documents by no later than 15 September 2025.
71. On 15 September 2025, Ms. Antunes de Jesus provided the following documents:
•
•
•
•
A document allegedly confirming the ongoing probate proceedings in Brazil;
An extract from the Services Portal of the Court of Justice of the State of São Paulo;
An alleged letter sent to FIFA in the context of the probate proceedings;
Instagram pictures of the Player with his children.
72. Ms. Antunes de Jesus further mentioned that this evidence demonstrated that probate
proceedings had in the meantime been opened in Brazil and that she and her children
were part of those proceedings, which was the most reliable proof to establish the
existence of the heirs to the Player. In addition, Ms. Antunes de Jesus alleged that she was
stated as an heir and, therefore, she, as the widow, should be registered as the legal
successor of the Player, thereby allowing the claim to duly continue.
73. Ms. Antunes de Jesus affirmed that any eventual amounts awarded would be securely
administered through the probate proceedings and would meaningfully support the
livelihood and well-being of each of the heirs. Moreover, she mentioned that a public
prosecutor was appointed in the process and sent a letter to FIFA on the instruction of the
judge enquiring about any pending process involving the Player, further confirming the
regularity and legitimacy of the probate procedure and demonstrating that she had
standing to participate in the present proceedings as the successor of the Player.
74. Furthermore, Ms. Antunes de Jesus argued that, given that the probate proceedings were
ongoing, the division of assets would be addressed in that process with a detailed analysis
of each heir’s interests and continuous oversight by the appointed public prosecutor.
Therefore, any amounts eventually recognized in the present case would be safeguarded
and properly distributed through the probate process to the heirs, in accordance with the
judge’s decision and under the supervision of the public prosecutor’s office.
75. Hence, Ms. Antunes de Jesus asserted that the documentation proved that she was an heir
to the estate, as are the children. Therefore, she requested that FIFA continue the
proceedings.
pg. 20
REF. FPSD-18031
e. Duplica of the Club
76. On 19 September 2025, the Club was invited to provide its comments on the latest
submissions. The Club did not provide any response to the submitted replica but requested
FIFA to grant a new deadline to Ms. Antunes de Jesus to submit official documentation for
the executor of the estate and, otherwise, to decide the case based on the Regulations.
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
77. 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 31 January 2025 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, the aforementioned edition of the Procedural Rules
is applicable to the matter at hand.
78. 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 (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 Brazilian player and a Thai club.
79. 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. Admissibility of the amendment to the claim
80. The Chamber then recalled that Ms. Antunes de Jesus submitted unsolicited
correspondence on 2 April 2025, i.e., after the time limit granted for the submission of the
replica, wishing to amend the claim on the grounds that the Club had allegedly won the
championship and secured promotion to the Thai League 2 and, therefore, the Player
would be entitled to an additional bonus.
81. In this regard, the Chamber referred to art. 11 par. 4 of the Procedural Rules, which
establishes that “(…) Submissions and evidence filed outside the relevant time limit shall be
disregarded”. Based on this, the Chamber decided to disregard the amended request, as it
was filed after the time limit granted by the FIFA General Secretariat.
pg. 21
REF. FPSD-18031
c. Burden of proof
82. 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).
d. Merits of the dispute
83. 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
84. The Chamber then moved to the substance of the matter, noting that it is a claim brought
by a player against a club for outstanding remuneration, compensation for breach of
contract, and moral damages.
85. The Chamber recalled that, according to the Player, the Club terminated the Contract
without just cause due to his illness. Therefore, he argued that he was entitled to
outstanding remuneration as well as compensation for breach of contract.
86. The Chamber noted that conversely, the Club argued that it terminated the Contract
because the Player refused to sign an agreement and the Club needed to remove him from
the list to obtain a foreign player quota. The Club stated that it was willing to pay half of the
salary for December 2024 and half of the salary for January 2025 as compensation, but no
further amounts.
87. In this context, the Chamber acknowledged that its task, in principle, was to establish
whether the Player was entitled to outstanding remuneration and compensation.
Notwithstanding, the Chamber recalled that the Player passed away on 4 March 2025,
during the present proceedings. In this respect, the Player’s wife, Ms. Antunes de Jesus,
argued that she wished to pursue the claim and provided a power of attorney to the legal
representative. Consequently, the Chamber stressed that it should first determine whether
Ms. Antunes de Jesus had standing to sue on behalf of the Player.
pg. 22
REF. FPSD-18031
88. As a preliminary note and at a general level, the Chamber recalled that standing is
characterised as a matter of substantive law as opposed to procedural law, and that such
standing derives from the fact of the party in question being the legal holder of the right in
dispute. In other words, a party has standing to sue (or be sued) if the claim affects a
substantive right of its own. The Chamber underlined that both the case law of the Football
Tribunal and the precedents of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) have repeatedly
confirmed such a consideration.
89. In this context, the Chamber acknowledged that it should essentially determine whether
Ms. Antunes de Jesus demonstrated that she was the legal holder of the rights in dispute.
90. First, the Chamber referred to art. 9 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules, which establishes:
“1. Subject to the relevant FIFA regulations, only the following natural or legal persons
may be a party before a chamber:
a) member associations;
b) clubs affiliated to a member association;
c) players;
d) coaches;
e) single-entity leagues, only for the purposes of the FIFA Football Agent Regulations;
f) football agents licensed by FIFA;
or g) match agents licensed by FIFA”
91. Based on this article, only the parties mentioned therein can appear before a chamber of
the Football Tribunal. In this regard, when the claim was lodged, the Chamber had no
doubts that the Player had standing to sue and to be a party.
92. Notwithstanding, the Chamber also referred to the following facts:
•
On 13 March 2025, in the replica, when the Player’s legal representative informed the
FIFA General Secretariat that the Player had passed away, apart from the power of
attorney, they submitted the marriage certificate to prove that Ms. Antunes de Jesus was
the Player’s wife;
•
On 12 April 2025, the FIFA General Secretariat indicated that Ms. Antunes de Jesus, who
claimed to be the Player’s heir, did not appear to have standing to sue. Therefore, the
FIFA General Secretariat invited her to provide documentary evidence confirming the
assignment of rights and the Player’s legal succession;
•
On 30 April 2025, Ms. Antunes de Jesus requested the suspension of the deadlines, as
she might need documents from the Brazilian courts/authorities;
•
On 2 May 2025, the FIFA General Secretariat suspended the time limits and requested
Ms. Antunes de Jesus to submit the documents as soon as they became available;
pg. 23
REF. FPSD-18031
•
On 14 July 2025, Ms. Antunes de Jesus again provided the marriage certificate, this time
along with the Player’s death certificate, the children’s birth certificates, and school
certificates;
•
On 26 August 2025, again, the FIFA General Secretariat indicated that the documentation
provided appeared insufficient to confirm the assignment of rights and the Player’s legal
succession. Therefore, a new time limit was granted for her to provide more evidence;
•
On 15 September 2025, Ms. Antunes de Jesus provided the following documents: (i) a
document allegedly confirming the ongoing probate proceedings in Brazil; (ii) an extract
from the Services Portal of the Court of Justice of the State of São Paulo; (iii) an alleged
letter to FIFA in the context of the probate proceedings; and (iv) Instagram pictures of
the Player with his children.
93. In this context, and as a result of Ms. Antunes de Jesus’ insistence to obtain a decision at
this stage, the Chamber determined that it had to establish whether Ms. Antunes de Jesus
had provided sufficient evidence to confirm the formal assignment of rights and the
Player’s legal succession.
94. The Chamber’s conclusions in this respect were the following.
95. Regarding the death certificate, the Chamber noted that this document confirmed that the
Player passed away, which had already been proven in the replica with media information
and admitted by the Club. Moreover, it confirmed that he was married to Ms. Antunes de
Jesus. Additionally, with the marriage certificate, Ms. Antunes de Jesus proved that she was
the Player’s wife since 27 December 2017. Hence, the Chamber concluded that with this
document Ms. Antunes de Jesus could prove that she was the Player’s widow.
96. Moreover, the Chamber observed that with the children’s birth certificates, Ms. Antunes de
Jesus proved that the Player was the father of three children: Alice Antunes de Jesus and
Lucas Antunes de Jesus, children of both the Player and Ms. Antunes de Jesus, and Maria
Laura Munaretti Oliveira de Jesus (hereinafter: Mrs. Maria Laura Munaretti Oliveira de Jesus),
child of the Player and Ms. Cristina Munaretti de Oliveira.
97. Then, with the document allegedly confirming the ongoing probate proceedings in Brazil,
the Chamber acknowledged that Ms. Antunes de Jesus proved that, in fact, probate
proceedings were initiated. Nonetheless, the Chamber highlighted that these proceedings
were seemingly initiated by Mrs. Maria Laura Munaretti Oliveira de Jesus, the Player’s only
child from another relationship, and, at least from the evidence on file, Ms. Antunes de
Jesus did not appear to be actively participating in the proceedings, neither acting for
herself nor on behalf of her children, although she was listed as “an heir”.
pg. 24
REF. FPSD-18031
98. After a careful analysis of the file submitted by Ms. Antunes de Jesus, the Chamber did not
find any decision from the competent court establishing the Player’s legal succession or the
assignment of rights to Ms. Antunes de Jesus.
99. The Chamber remarked that while the extract from the Services Portal of the Court of
Justice of the State of São Paulo stated that Ms. Antunes de Jesus appeared to be one of
the Player’s heirs (“herdeira”), this did not appear to be a declaratory ruling issued by a court
but rather a designation to identify the parties. According to the Chamber, this conclusion
was supported by the fact that Mrs. Maria Laura Munaretti Oliveira de Jesus, who filed the
probate proceedings, was named as petitioner/plaintiff (“inventariante”) and not as an heir
despite being one of the Player’s children.
100. Lastly, the Chamber considered that the Instagram pictures provided by Ms. Antunes de
Jesus could prove that the Player was the father of three children, which was however
immaterial to instruct the assignment of rights and legal succession to pursue a claim.
101. Based on all the above, the majority of the Chamber was of the opinion that, with the
evidence on file, Ms. Antunes de Jesus could not prove the formal assignment of rights and
the Player’s legal succession, as it appeared that the legal succession had not been
established by the competent legal authority, i.e., the Brazilian court in charge of the
probate proceedings. After carefully examining the evidence on file, the majority of the
Chamber could only acknowledge that there were pending probate proceedings, that Ms.
Antunes de Jesus was the Player’s wife, and that the Player had three children. However,
the Chamber, by majority, stressed that there was no determination of the Player’s legal
succession.
102. In this respect, the majority of the Chamber highlighted that the Football Tribunal was not
the competent forum to determine whether Ms. Antunes de Jesus was in fact the Player’s
heir. Therefore, to prove the Player’s legal succession, the majority of the Chamber found
that it was necessary to provide the relevant ruling issued by the competent court, which
does not appear to have been issued yet.
103. The Chamber, by majority, pointed out that after the Player’s legal representative informed
that the Player had passed away, the FIFA General Secretariat already informed Ms.
Antunes de Jesus that she did not appear to have standing, and that confirmation of the
assignment of rights and the Player’s legal succession was necessary to analyse standing.
At that moment, Ms. Antunes de Jesus requested the suspension of the time limit and the
FIFA General Secretariat, based on the specific and sensitive circumstances and facts of the
case, granted it, urging her to present the documents as soon as they became available.
Notwithstanding, Ms. Antunes de Jesus decided to continue with the claim at all costs and
before those documents became available and decided to present evidence that was
insufficient to prove what was requested. The majority of the Chamber stressed that even
in this situation, and again considering the circumstances of the case, the FIFA General
Secretariat granted Ms. Antunes de Jesus a new deadline to provide further
pg. 25
REF. FPSD-18031
documentation. Nevertheless, the Chamber considered that this documentation was not
yet available, and the Player’s legal succession had not been determined at the time of this
decision.
104. The majority of the Chamber was of the opinion that Ms. Antunes de Jesus’s decision to
pursue the claim without the requested documents was premature, as she could have
waited until the court’s determination as the time limit was suspended.
105. Moreover, the majority of the Chamber recalled that Ms. Antunes de Jesus affirmed that
any amounts eventually recognized in the present case would be safeguarded and properly
distributed through the probate process to the heirs, allegedly in accordance with the
judge’s decision and under the supervision of the public prosecutor’s office. However, in
the majority of the Chamber’s view, there was no evidence to demonstrate that she was
actually the legal holder of the right in dispute, as Ms. Antunes de Jesus did not provide any
evidence establishing that she has been appointed as the executor of the estate.
106. Based on all the above, the Chamber, by majority, concluded that, although the Player,
when he lodged the claim, naturally had standing to sue, this standing was lost upon his
passing. Therefore, it was for the legal successor(s) to prove that they had standing to
continue with the claim, as standing must endure over time and be present both at the
moment of filing the claim and at the time of the decision. Nevertheless, Ms. Antunes de
Jesus failed to discharge this burden.
107. At this point, the Chamber referred to CAS 2015/A/3910, in which the Panel ruled on a
similar matter. In that case, the Panel stated:
“Coming back to Art. 6 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules the Panel concludes that the
purpose of the respective rule need not be decided in the case at hand. Even if the
provision was meant (only) to provide specific protection to the persons listed therein,
the Panel finds that – absent any indications to the contrary – this protection must be
extended to the Appellant based on the specific and exceptional circumstances of this
case, where the claim was filed by a person complying with the prerequisites of Art. 6
par. 1 of the Procedural Rules, i.e. where the procedural requirements were met at the
time when the claim was pending before the FIFA organs and where the transfer of title
occurred by law, i.e. with no (active) involvement of the coach and his legal successor. In
such specific context the universal successor not only acquires the substantive claim of
the defunct, but also the latter’s legal position in the pending proceedings, i.e. the ability
to file a claim before the FIFA instances. For the avoidance of any doubt the Panel
clarifies, that it would have denied any standing to sue of the Appellant if not the defunct,
but the Appellant had initiated the proceedings before the FIFA instances, because with
respect to the question who is entitled to initiate proceedings before the FIFA instances,
Art. 6 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules is very clear and not open to interpretation by this
Panel. Only with respect to the question whether or not a procedure (initiated in
compliance with Art. 6 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules) may be continued by a legal
pg. 26
REF. FPSD-18031
successor, the Panel finds that there is a lacuna in the applicable rules that needs to be
solved in the manner advocated here, i.e. that any changes of facts in the course of the
procedure will not remove FIFA’s competence to decide the matter. To conclude,
therefore, the Panel finds that the Appellant has standing to sue.”
108. Accordingly, the majority of the Chamber considered that establishing that Ms. Antunes de
Jesus did not prove that she was the legal successor of the Player would not be
contradictory to the cited case, as, in that case, the heir requested that the procedure be
put “on hold” until the claimant’s heirs had taken over the procedure pursuant to the estate
probate and only requested FIFA to continue the proceedings once she was declared the
sole legal heir of the claimant. In this respect, the same majority of the Chamber remarked
that the difference between the aforementioned case and the present matter was that Ms.
Antunes de Jesus requested to continue the proceedings without the declaration of the
Player’s legal succession. Thus, it could not be determined that Ms. Antunes de Jesus
acquired the substantive claim of the Player or the Player’s legal position in the pending
proceedings.
109. In light of all the above, and despite being mindful of the highly sensitive circumstances
and facts of the case, the majority of the Chamber considered that Ms. Antunes de Jesus
failed to prove that she had standing to sue. Therefore, the Chamber, by majority, decided
to reject the claim.
110. Without prejudice to the above, and even though, for the reasons stated, the Chamber was
formally precluded from assessing the consequences of the termination, it nevertheless
wished to underscore its profound dissatisfaction with the Club’s conduct. In particular, the
Chamber was appalled by the facts surrounding the case and the Club’s reprehensible
behaviour at the time of termination.
e. Costs
111. 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.
112. 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.
113. Lastly, the DRC concluded its deliberations by rejecting any other requests for relief made
by any of the parties.
pg. 27
REF. FPSD-18031
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Cassio Francisco De Jesus, is rejected.
2.
This decision is rendered without costs.
For the Football Tribunal:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
pg. 28
REF. FPSD-18031
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. 29