Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF. FPSD-18183
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 6 June 2025
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the player
Yevhen Troianovskyi
COMPOSITION:
Frans DE WEGER (The Netherlands), Chairperson
Khalid AWAD ALTHEBITY (Saudi Arabia), Member
Johan VAN GAALEN (South Africa), Member
CLAIMANT:
Yevhen Troianovskyi, Ukraine
Represented by Evgenii Efremov
RESPONDENT:
Lynx FC, Gibraltar
pg. 2
REF. FPSD-18183
I. Facts of the case
1.
On 27 July 2024, the Ukrainian player, Yevhen Troianovskyi (hereinafter: the Player or the
Claimant), and the Gibraltarian club, Lynx FC (hereinafter: the Club or the Respondent)
entered into an employment contract (hereinafter: the Contract) valid as from 1 August
2024 until the end of the 2024/2025 season.
2.
Sections e) and f) of the preamble to the Contract state (quoted verbatim):
‘’e. The Player and the Club agree that the Player will be exclusively registered with the Club as
a player from the start of the 2024/2025 season (01 August 2024) until the end of season
2024/2025 (save for clause 12.2), only after the player has successfully completed the Club
physical testing (the “Registration Term”).
f. The 2024/2025 season will end, unless the Club qualifies for the UEFA Champions
League, Europa League, or Europa Conference League, in which case the season will be extended
until the Club is eliminated from the competitions (the “End of Season”).”
3.
Art. 5 of the Contract provides:
‘’ 5. TERMINATION
5.1. This Agreement can only be terminated under the following circumstances:
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
v.
vi.
vii.
viii.
ix.
4.
By mutual written consent between Club and Player.
By the Club if the Player arrives and is in breach of Clause 1v and 1xiii
By the Club, if the Player is guilty of gross misconduct in accordance with the
respective Club Rules.
By the Club, if the Player has not reached the required level of performance at
the midpoint of the season, in accordance with the respective Club Rules.
By the Player if, by the opening of the second transfer window of the season, he
has appeared in less than 10% of the Official Matches in which the Club has
been involved, by choice of the Club.
For the purposes of 5v. above, a Player will be deemed to have appeared in an
Official Match if he has played for more than 20 minutes in that particular
match.
By the successful transfer of the Player to another Club during the GFA Transfer
Window, in accordance with the GFA League Rules on Player Transfers.
By the successful sale of the Player to another Club, subject to Clause 4.2
If the Club fails to secure a place in the Championship Group (Gibraltar National
League), the Player or Club may mutually terminate the Contract in accordance
with Clause 5.1i above’’
In accordance with art. 1 of the Contract, the Respondent undertook to pay to the Claimant
a remuneration of EUR 1,000 net per calendar month in arrears starting on 22 August 2024.
pg. 3
REF. FPSD-18183
5.
In addition, the Claimant was also entitled to the following, as per art. 11 of the Contract
(quoted verbatim):
‘’TERMS OF RENUMERATION
1. The Club will pay 1.000 Euros (Net) per calendar month. The salary will be paid in arrears,
commencing 22 August 2024.
2. The Club will pay a bonus of 1.000 Euros (Net) if the Club qualifies for the UEFA Champions
League, Europa League, or Europa Conference League competition within the season.
3. Accommodation will be provided for you and your wife only.
4. After completion of the Player Contract, the FINAL salary payment will be released after
the return of all Club equipment and acceptable return of any Club accommodation
which he/she has occupied.
5. Once both items have been verified by a Club Official, his/her final salary will be released.’’
6.
On 15 December 2024, the Respondent presented the Claimant with a termination
agreement, a document entitled ‘’Player release from Lynx Football Club’’, a document
entitled ‘’Proof of Contract End Date’’, and a document entitled ‘’Proof signed by former club
that there is no TPO of the player’s economic rights’’. The termination agreement on file is not
signed by the Claimant.
7.
On 21 December 2024, the Claimant played his final game for the Respondent.
8.
On 13 January 2025, the Claimant sent a notice of default to the Respondent requesting
the payment of EUR 5,000 as compensation for the termination of the Contract. In his letter,
the Claimant granted a 15-day deadline for the Respondent to comply with the payment.
II. Proceedings before FIFA
9. On 11 February 2025, the Claimant lodged the claim at hand before FIFA. A summary of the
parties‘ respective positions is detailed below.
a. Claim of the Claimant
10. The Claimant alleged having joined the Respondent on 27 July 2024, and that the Contract
was set to finish at the end of the 2024-2025 season, which he submitted was on 16 March
2025.
11. The Claimant further submitted that the Respondent provided him accommodation, and
his salaries for August, September and October 2024, namely EUR 3,000.
pg. 4
REF. FPSD-18183
12. In addition, the Claimant alleged that on 15 December 2024, the Respondent unilaterally
terminated the Contract by handing him several documents, including a termination
agreement signed by its representatives. However, the Claimant refused to sign the
termination agreement.
13. The Claimant also highlighted that, despite the termination of the Contract, the
Respondent agreed for him to participate in one final official game on 21 December 2024.
14. Therefore, the Claimant sustained that he was entitled to EUR 5,000 as compensation for
the termination of the Contract, which he says was equivalent to residual value of the
Contract at the time of the breach.
15. The Claimant’s requests for relief were the following (quoted verbatim):
‘’Prayers for Relief
1.FIFA DRC shall accept the claim of the Claimant.
2. FIFA DRC shall order the Respondent to pay to the Claimant Euro’s 5,000 net as
Compensation, plus 5% interest p.a. as from 15 December 2024 until the date of effective
payment.
3. FIFA DRC shall impose sportive sanctions on the Respondent.’’
b. Reply of the Respondent
16. In its reply, the Respondent argued that the termination of contract was made in
accordance with the Contract, because the Claimant had allegedly been intoxicated with
alcohol at several training sessions, club meetings and league matches.
17. The Respondent further alleged having warned the Claimant ‘’repeatedly’’, having
suspended him in September 2024 and having informed the Gibraltar Football Association
(GFA) of the situation.
18. The Respondent also alleged having found several alcohol containers in the
accommodation provided to the Claimant and having had to be escorted by a security team
when visiting the Claimant’s accommodation.
19. The Respondent disputed the Claimant’s allegation that he did not sign the termination
agreement. To the contrary, the Respondent asserted that the Claimant had signed the
termination agreement and that his signature was witnessed by the ‘’Security Operative and
the Respondent’s Cleaner, who had been mobilised to the accommodation.’’
pg. 5
REF. FPSD-18183
20. The Respondent confirmed that the termination agreement and the other documents are
dated 15 December 2024, but that despite this the Claimant has participated in a match for
the club on 21 December 2024.
21. The Respondent mentioned that, despite the Claimant’s disciplinary issues which led them
to proceed with the termination, they accepted the Claimant's requests to be included in a
final game on 21 December 2024, stay in the accommodation until Christmas and
participate in the players’ Christmas party.
22. The Respondent’s requests for relief were the following (quoted verbatim):
In light of all the above, Lynx reiterates for a final time, that:
(1) Undisputedly, the Claimant’s Termination was in accordance with the terms of his Player
Contract.
(2) After a continuous period of gross misconduct, and a worsening failure to uphold the
discipline requirements of the Respondent, the Claimant was initially suspended and
subsequently
(3) All of these actions were advised to the Gibraltar Football Association, in writing.
(4) The Claimant, signed by hand the Respondent’s Termination Agreement.
(5) The Respondent acknowledges the final fixture of the year on 21 December but has set out
the reasoning behind this event above.
(6) Therefore, in view of all the above, the Player’s claim is inadmissible.
Finally, Lynx reiterates that it has not commented on the merits of this case only because
it is of the unwavering view that the Claim is entirely inadmissible.
However, for the sake of completeness, Lynx remains entrenched in the view that (i) the Player
showed a flagrant disregard to his contractual provisions through his persistent gross
misconduct, and (ii)contrary to the Player’s remarks, the persistent failure to improve this
misconduct–constitute just cause to terminate an employment contract. ‘’’
pg. 6
REF. FPSD-18183
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
23. 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 11 February 2025 and submitted for decision
on 6 June 2025. Taking into account the wording of art. 31 and 34 of the January 2025
edition of the Procedural Rules Governing the Football Tribunal (hereinafter: the Procedural
Rules), the aforementioned edition of the Procedural Rules is applicable to the matter at
hand.
24. Furthermore, the Chamber referred to art. 2 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules and observed
that in accordance with art. 23 par. 1 in combination with art. 22 par. 1 lit. b) of the
Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (hereinafter: the Regulations) (January
2025 edition), the Dispute Resolution Chamber is competent to deal with the matter at
stake, which concerns an employment-related dispute with an international dimension
between a Ukrainian player and a Gibraltarian club.
25. 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 January 2025 edition of the Regulations is applicable to the matter at hand
as to the substance.
b. Burden of proof
26. The Chamber recalled the basic principle of burden of proof, as stipulated in art. 13
par. 5 of the Procedural Rules, according to which a party claiming a right on the basis of
an alleged fact shall carry the respective burden of proof. Likewise, the Chamber stressed
the wording of art. 13 par. 4 of the Procedural Rules, pursuant to which it may consider
evidence not filed by the parties, including without limitation the evidence generated by or
within the Transfer Matching System (TMS).
c. Merits of the dispute
27. Having established the competence and the applicable regulations, the Chamber entered
into the merits of the dispute. In this respect, the Chamber started by acknowledging all
the above-mentioned facts as well as the arguments and the documentation on file.
However, the Chamber emphasised that in the following considerations it will refer only to
the facts, arguments and documentary evidence, which it considered pertinent for
assessing the matter at hand.
pg. 7
REF. FPSD-18183
i. Main legal discussion and considerations
28. The Chamber then moved to the substance of the matter and took note of the fact that the
parties agreed that the Contract was terminated by the Respondent but strongly disputed
whether the Club had just cause to terminate the Contract.
29. In this context, the Chamber acknowledged that its task was to first establish when the
termination happened. Once this was established, it must then determine whether the
termination occurred with just cause, and whether compensation should be awarded.
30. In that respect the Chamber noted that, on 15 December 2024, the Respondent had
submitted documents to the Claimant indicating that they intended to terminate the
Claimant’s Contract, including a document entitled ‘’Player release from Lynx Football Club’’
and a termination agreement.
31. However, the Chamber also recalled that, as both parties have admitted, the Claimant was
authorised to participate in one final match with the Respondent’s first team on 21
December 2025.
32. Hence, while the nature of the documents submitted by the Respondent to the Claimant
on 15 December 2024 denoted an intent to terminate, this was, in the Chamber’s view,
nullified by the fact that the Club allowed the Claimant to participate in his final match and,
thus, render his services as a professional football player, on 21 December 2025. Thus, the
Chamber determined that the Contract could have only been effectively terminated as of
22 December 2024.
33. After this determination, the Chamber took into consideration the parties’ respective
positions regarding the circumstances that led to the contract termination.
34. The Chamber considered the Claimant’s position to the effect that the Contract was
terminated by the Respondent without just cause, as the Respondent presented him a
termination agreement requesting his signature, as well as other documents confirming
their intention to terminate the Contract without prior notice.
35. The Chamber also noted that the Respondent mentioned having suspended the Claimant
for his disciplinary issues, and that they moved forward with the termination because the
Claimant continued the previously sanctioned behaviour.
36. The Chamber further considered that the Respondent disputed the Claimant’s allegation
to the effect that he did not sign the termination agreement.
37. However, the Chamber noted that the Respondent’s allegations were not supported by any
evidence, as the Respondent filed no documents supporting their position. In this sense,
pg. 8
REF. FPSD-18183
the Chamber recalled that the burden of proof lies with the party putting forth the
allegation, pursuant to art. 13 par. 5 of the Procedural Rules.
38. At this stage, the Chamber referred to art. 14 of the Regulations according to which, "A
contract may be terminated by either party without consequences of any kind (either payment
of compensation or imposition of sporting sanctions) where there is just cause. In general, just
cause shall exist in any circumstance in which it can no longer be reasonably expected in good
faith from a party to continue a contractual relationship."
39. In other words, and in line with the well-established jurisprudence of the Chamber, the
termination of a contract should always be an action of last resort. Hence, if there are more
lenient measures which can be taken in order for an employer to assure the employee’s
fulfilment of his contractual duties, such measures must be taken before terminating an
employment contract. In other words, as consistently held by this Chamber, a premature
termination of an employment contract can only be an ultima ratio measure.
40. Considering that the Respondent did not file supporting evidence, the Chamber considered
that there was no proof to establish any sanctions or warnings had been imposed on the
Claimant prior to the termination of the Contract, despite the Respondent’s allegations. In
absence of corroborating evidence, the Chamber determined that the termination of the
Contract was not ultima ratio, and therefore that the Club terminated the Contract without
just cause.
ii. Consequences
41. Having stated the above, the Chamber turned its attention to the question of the
consequences of such unjustified breach of contract committed by the Respondent.
42. The Chamber observed that the outstanding remuneration at the time of termination, on
22 December 2024, was equivalent to 2 monthly salaries under the contract, amounting to
EUR 2,000 net.
43. The Chamber noted that the salary of November 2024 was due on 22 November 2024 and,
in keeping in line with its longstanding jurisprudence, the Chamber considered the salary
of December 2024 to be outstanding remuneration, as the termination of contract
occurred after the 15th day of the month.
44. As a consequence, and in accordance with the general legal principle of pacta sunt servanda,
the Chamber decided that the Respondent is liable to pay to the Claimant the amounts
which were outstanding under the contract at the moment of the termination, i.e. EUR
2,000 net (i.e. EUR 1,000 net times 2).
45. In addition, taking into consideration the Claimant’s request as well as the constant practice
of the Football Tribunal in this regard, the Chamber decided to award the Claimant interest
pg. 9
REF. FPSD-18183
at the rate of 5% p.a. on the outstanding amounts, respectively, as from 23 November 2024
and 23 December 2024 until the date of effective payment.
46. Having stated the above, the Chamber turned to the calculation of the amount of
compensation payable by the Respondent in the case at stake. In doing so, the Chamber
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.
47. In application of the relevant provision, the Chamber held that it first of all 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 Chamber
established that no such compensation clause was included in the employment contract
at the basis of the matter at stake.
48. As a consequence, the members of the Chamber 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 Chamber
recalled that, as a general rule, the compensation to be paid to the player by the club shall
be equal to the 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)).
49. Bearing in mind the foregoing as well as the claim of the Claimant, the Chamber 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 EUR 2,516.13 (i.e. the residual value of the contract from the
date of termination until the end of the 2024-2025 season). As per the Claimant’s
submissions and the information on TMS, the 2024-2025 season of the Respondent ended
on 16 March 2025, the Chamber decided to award the salary of March 2025 prorated over
16 days.
50. In continuation, the Chamber 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 DRC 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.
pg. 10
REF. FPSD-18183
51. However, in taking into account the information provided by the Claimant and the
information available on TMS, the Claimant had not found subsequent employment and
therefore was not able to mitigate his damages.
52. Consequently, on account of all the above-mentioned considerations and the specificities
of the case at hand, the Chamber decided that the Respondent must pay the amount of
EUR 2,516.13 to the Claimant, which was to be considered a reasonable and justified
amount of compensation for breach of contract in the present matter.
53. Lastly, taking into consideration the Claimant’s request as well as the constant practice of
the Football Tribunal in this regard, the Chamber decided to award the Claimant interest
on said compensation at the rate of 5% p.a. as of 23 December 2024 until the date of
effective payment.
iii. Consequences of art. 17 par. 4 of the Regulations
54. In continuation, the Chamber focused on the further consequences of the breach of
contract in question and, in this respect, it addressed the question of sporting sanctions
against the club in accordance with art. 17 par. 4 of the Regulations. The cited provision
stipulates that, in addition to the obligation to pay compensation, sporting sanctions shall
be imposed on any club found to be in breach of contract during the protected period.
55. In this respect, the Chamber referred to item 7 of the “Definitions” section of the
Regulations, which stipulates inter alia that the protected period shall last “for three entire
seasons or three years, whichever comes first, following the entry into force of a contract, where
such contract is concluded prior to the 28th birthday of the professional, or two entire seasons
or two years, whichever comes first, following the entry into force of a contract, where
such contract is concluded after the 28th birthday of the professional”.
56. In this respect, the Chamber took note that the Player was born on 2 July 1993 and the
relevant contract with the Club was concluded on 1 August 2024. Furthermore, the
Chamber noted that the Club terminated contract without just cause on 22 December
2024. The breach of contract by the Club had therefore occurred within the protected
period.
57. Furthermore, the Chamber noted that the Club had already been held liable for breaching
other players’ contracts without just cause on several recent occasions; in particular, in
cases FPSD-14100, FPSD-15770, and FPSD-17365.
58. Consequently, the Chamber decided that, by virtue of art. 17 par. 4 of the Regulations, the
club shall be sanctioned with a ban from registering any new players, either nationally or
internationally, for two entire and consecutive registration periods.
pg. 11
REF. FPSD-18183
iv. Compliance with monetary decisions
59. Finally, taking into account the applicable Regulations, the Chamber 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.
60. In this regard, the DRC 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.
61. In this regard, the DRC highlighted that, against clubs, the consequences 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.
62. Notwithstanding the above, the DRC wished to remark that in accordance with art. 24 par.
3 of the Regulations, the aforementioned consequences may be excluded where the
pertinent FIFA deciding body has already imposed on the same party a sporting sanction
on the basis of article 12bis, 17 or 18quater of the Regulations.
63. In this respect, considering that art. 17 par. 4 of the Regulations applies in the matter, the
Chamber established that art. 24 par. 2 of the Regulations shall not apply, insofar as in case
the Respondent fails to comply with the decision at hand, the application of a further ban
from registering any new players on top of the one already being served by the Respondent
would be moot and against the spirit of the Regulations, in particularly the enforcement
mechanism established under art. 24 of the Regulations.
64. In view of the above, the DRC decided that, if the aforementioned sum plus interest is not
paid within 30 days of notification of this decision, the present matter shall be submitted,
upon request of the Claimant, to the FIFA Disciplinary Committee for its consideration and
formal decision.
65. The Respondent shall make full payment (including all applicable interest) to the bank
account provided by the Claimant in the Bank Account Registration Form, a copy of which
is available in the present file on the FIFA Legal Portal.
pg. 12
REF. FPSD-18183
d. Costs
66. 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.
67. 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.
68. Lastly, the DRC concluded its deliberations by rejecting any other requests for relief made
by any of the parties.
pg. 13
REF. FPSD-18183
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Yevhen Troianovskyi, is partially accepted.
2.
The Respondent, Lynx FC, must pay to the Claimant the following amounts:
- EUR 2,000 net as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as follows:
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount EUR 1,000 net as from 23 November 2024 until the date
of effective payment; and
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount EUR 1,000 net as from 23 December 2024 until the date
of effective payment
- EUR 2,516.13 net as compensation for breach of contract plus 5% interest p.a. as from
22 December 2024 until the date of effective payment.
3.
Any further claims of the Claimant are rejected.
4.
The Respondent shall be banned from registering any new players, either nationally
or internationally, for the next two entire and consecutive registration periods following the
notification of the present decision.
5.
Full payment (including all applicable interest) shall be made to the bank account indicated
in the enclosed Bank Account Registration Form.
6.
If the aforementioned sum plus interest is not paid within 30 days of notification of this
decision, the present matter shall be submitted, upon request, to the FIFA Disciplinary
Committee for its consideration and formal decision.
7.
This decision is rendered without costs.
For the Football Tribunal:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
pg. 14
REF. FPSD-18183
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. 15