Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF. FPSD-18474
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 13 November 2025
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the player Luiz
Henrique Diniz da Rosa
COMPOSITION:
Frans DE WEGER (The Netherlands), Chairperson
Michele COLUCCI (Italy), Member
Jorge GUTIÉRREZ (Costa Rica), Member
CLAIMANT:
Luiz Henrique Diniz da Rosa, Brazil
Represented by Pvbt Law
RESPONDENT:
Al Wasl, United Arab Emirates
pg. 2
REF. FPSD-18474
I. Facts of the case
1.
On 19 January 2021, the Brazilian player, Luiz Henrique Diniz da Rosa (hereinafter: the
Player or the Claimant), and the Emirati club, Al Wasl (hereinafter: the Club or the Respondent)
entered into an employment contract (hereinafter: the Contract) valid as from its date of
signature until 30 June 2023.
2.
In accordance with the Contract, the Club undertook to pay the Player a monthly
remuneration of USD 5,000.
3.
Clause 4.3 of the Contact provided the following (quoted verbatim):
“[The Club] shall undertake following:
[…]
3. It shall provide the Player with full insurance that covers the cases of disability and death
throughout the contract term with [the Club] in accordance with the regulation of United Arab
Emirates Football Association, player’s status transfers regulation. The insurance coverage
shall include the cases whose effects will extend after the contract expiration. According to
the regulation stipulated above, and in the event of player transfer or loan (to another club
or football company), [the Club] shall not be adhered to this item.”
4.
On 1 July 2022, the Player, the Club and the Emirati club Al Hamiryah Cultural & Sports Club
(hereinafter: the Loanee Club) entered into an agreement to temporarily transfer the Player
from the Club to the Loanee Club (hereinafter: the Loan Agreement) for the period of 1 July
2022 until 31 May 2023.
5.
Clause 3 of the Loan Agreement reads as follows (quoted verbatim):
“[The Loanee Club] will be responsible for any injury that may occur to the player during the
loan period, also if the recovery and getting cured from the injury extends after the loan
duration. [The Loanee Club] recognizes and acknowledges that the player is in perfect state
of health for the provision of its services as a professional player as he passed the medical
test in United Arab Emirates, thus assuming the absolute liability for injuries that may occur
to the player, being in charge of [the Loanee Club], the expenses that require medical
attention until the final medication recovery, also till the player gets cured and able to
officially play and participate. [The Loanee Club] shall pay [the Club] the compensation which
shall cover any damages and/or losses that may happen to [the Club] as a sequence of the
player’s injury.”
pg. 3
REF. FPSD-18474
6.
On 28 November 2022, the Player sent a letter to the Loanee Club, with a copy to the Club,
claiming that he had sustained a serious injury during an official match on 13 November
2022. In his correspondence, the Player alleged that the Loanee Club has failed to provide
treatment or updates regarding necessary surgical procedures, which could jeopardize his
recovery and future performance. Citing art. 3 of the Loan Agreement, the Player requested
the Loanee Club to arrange proper medical treatment within 72 hours.
7.
On 13 December 2022, the Player sent a follow-up demand to the Loanee Club regarding
its alleged failure to provide medical treatment, again copying the Club. The letter granted
the Loanee Club additional 72 hours to arrange proper treatment, warning that if the
deadline was not met, the Player would seek treatment in Brazil and request
reimbursement for all related expenses. The Player further stated that silence from the
Loanee Club would be considered acceptance of these terms.
8.
On 15 December 2022, the Loanee Club replied to the Player as follows (quoted verbatim):
“Dear sir,
In response to your letter regarding the player, and regarding the player’s injury in the Hatta
match on 13/11/2022, so we would like to inform Your Excellency that a CT scan was done for
the player and the result of the x-ray was a cruciate ligament cut. And the club's medical staff
follows up the player daily, and hospitals and doctors have been contacted to determine the
procedure for the operation, and await their response.
We thank you in advance for your understanding and remain at your disposal to provide any
clarification you may deem necessary.
Sincerely,
General secretary
Ammar Almehiri”
9.
On 22 December 2022, the Player replied to the Loanee Club’s last correspondence as
follows (quoted verbatim):
“Dear Sirs,
We acknowledge receipt of your e-mail dated 15 December 2022, in connection with our
previous communications regarding the Brazilian player Luiz Henrique Diniz da Rosa.
As you are well aware, the Player has been injured for over 5 weeks now, and the medical
officers who evaluated him all confirmed he needs urgent surgery.
pg. 4
REF. FPSD-18474
The lack of attention and respect by your Club, which clearly endangers the Player’s career, is
unacceptable.
In this respect, please be aware that: IF THE PLAYER IS NOT SCHEDULED OR SUBMITTED TO
SURGERY BY 26 DECEMBER 2022, HE WILL SEEK TREATMENT INDEPENDENTLY AND SUBMIT A
CLAIM FOR REIUMBURSEMENT (sic) AND DAMAGES.
We hope you can appreciate the urgency of the matter and provide the Player with adequate
treatment accordingly.
Again: If the Player is not treated by 26 December, he will leave the Club on 27 December to
seek immediate treatment elsewhere.
Yours truly,”
10. On 28 December 2022, the Loanee Club replied to the Player’s last correspondence as
follows (quoted verbatim):
“Dear Mr,
In response to your message regarding the player, and regarding the player's injury, Luiz, as
we sent you before, and the player was contacted personally and the mediator, Tariq, is
awaiting medical procedures with specialized hospitals and insurance companies, and
awaiting a response as soon as possible.
We appreciate your interest in the player
We thank you in advance for your understanding and remain at your disposal to provide any
clarification you may deem necessary.
sincerely,”
11. On 9 January 2023, the Player booked a flight from Dubai (United Arab Emirates) to
Florianopolis (Brazil) at a cost of AED 4,500.
12. On 9 February 2023, the Player underwent surgery in Brazil.
13. On 24 May 2023, Dr. Marcos Silvino (hereinafter: Dr. Silvino) issued a medical report
regarding the Player’s physical therapy treatment.
14. On 18 October 2023, Dr. Luis Fernando Zukanovich Funchal (hereinafter: Dr. Zukanovich),
declared that the Player had undergone surgery approximately nine months earlier for
ligament reconstruction, medical meniscoplasty, and osteochondroplasty on his right
knee. Dr. Zukanovich further stated that the Player had successfully completed
pg. 5
REF. FPSD-18474
rehabilitation and was in the final phase of returning to play, requiring transition work to
the field.
15. On 16 January 2024, Dr. Silvino issued a receipt in the total amount of BRL 6,700 for the
Player’s 66 physiotherapy sessions
16. On 23 February 2025, Dr. Zukanovich declared that, on 9 March 2023, he received the
following payments from the Player for the medical treatment provided, totalling BRL
17,480:
-
BRL 16,980 regarding the payment of team medical fees related to a surgical knee
ligament reconstruction procedure; and
-
BRL 500 referring to the payment of a medical consultation for analysis, diagnosis,
examination evaluation and determination of the surgical procedure for the knee.
17. In addition, Dr. Zukanovich stated that the above-mentioned amounts did not include (i) BRL
6,882 corresponding to the hospital payment, (ii) BRL 1,800 corresponding to payments
made to the anesthesia team; and (iii) BRL 100 corresponding to pre-operative laboratory
tests.
18. On 24 February 2025, the Player put the Club in default for reimbursement of the medical
expenses in the amount of USD 127,666. The Player granted the Club 10 days to remedy
the default.
19. On the same date, the Club responded the Player’s notice by rejecting liability for his claims
related to the medical treatment and expenses. It argued that any such claims are timebarred, emphasized that a tripartite loan agreement placed full responsibility for the
Player’s medical care on the Loanee Club, and noted that the Player accepted these terms.
The Club further stated that the Player acted independently by seeking treatment in Brazil
without authorization, and therefore it could not be held accountable. The letter concluded
by urging that all claims be directed to the Loanee Club, in accordance with the Loan
Agreement.
20. On 25 February 2025, the Player sent a further letter to the Club reaffirming his position.
II. Proceedings before FIFA
21. On 6 March 2025, the Claimant filed the claim at hand before FIFA. A summary of the
parties’ respective positions is detailed below.
pg. 6
REF. FPSD-18474
a. Position of the Player
22. In his claim, the Player alleged he is entitled to reimbursement for medical expenses, flight
tickets, and salaries for the period he was unable to perform his professional duties.
23. The Player submitted that on 13 November 2022, he suffered an injury while playing for
the Loanee Club. He further stated that the injury was diagnosed as a tear of the anterior
cruciate ligament (ACL) and medial collateral ligament (MCL), requiring surgical
intervention for complete recovery.
24. The Player argued that the Loanee Club failed to provide him with appropriate medical
assistance, so he travelled to Brazil at his own costs.
25. According to the Player, he underwent surgery on 9 February 2023 for ACL and MCL
reconstruction, as well as a meniscectomy of the right knee.
26. The Player argued that the events giving rise to the dispute occurred within two years prior
to the filing of the claim. He noted that the employment contract with the Loanee Club
expired on 31 May 2023, and that he incurred medical expenses on 9 March 2023 (surgical
costs) and 18 October 2023 (physical rehabilitation).
27. The Player acknowledged that this insurance obligation was suspended during the loan
period, namely from 1 July 2022 to 31 May 2023, but emphasized that upon his return to
the Club on 1 June 2023, the Contract resumed in full.
28. Referring to the Loan Agreement, the Player noted that it contained a clause obligating the
Loanee Club to indemnify and hold the Club harmless for any injuries sustained by the
Player. In his view, this obligation was strictly between the Loanee Club and the Club and
did not affect the present claim.
29. The Player also claimed entitlement to salary payments for the period during which he was
unable to secure employment due to physical incapacity.
30. In this regard, the Player alleged that the negligence of both clubs resulted in a delay of
nearly three months before he could undergo reconstructive surgery. Consequently, he
remained unfit to play until late October 2023, by which time all professional leagues had
closed, preventing him from obtaining employment.
31. As a result, the Player requested that the Club be held liable for salary compensation for
the period from July to December 2023, or at minimum, from July to October 2023, when
he was medically cleared to resume professional activity.
32. The Player requested the following relief (quoted verbatim):
pg. 7
REF. FPSD-18474
“Based on the facts, arguments, legal grounds, and evidence brought herein, the Claimant
hereby requests the honorable Dispute Resolution Chamber of the Football Tribunal to accept
this claim and pass a decision:
a. Condemning Wasl to reimburse:
i) US$5,109 in medical expenses;
ii) US$1,307 in physiotherapy expenses;
iii) US$1,250 in return ticket from UAE to Brazil.
b. Condemning Wasl to compensate the Player with US$120,000 in concept of salaries for the
period between July and December 2023 during which the Player remained unemployed due
to medical disability.
Or, successively, to compensate the Player with US$80,000 in concept of salaries for the
period between July and October 2023 during which the Player was unable to resume training.
c. Condemning Wasl to pay interest on default at the rate of 5% (fiver percent) per year from
each due date (a and b above).
d. Condemning Wasl to support all costs associated with this dispute; and
e. Imposing further financial and sportive sanction it may deem appropriate to the
Respondent for its continued and unjustified delay in performing its medical and payment
obligations.”
b. Position of the Respondent
33. In its reply, the Club requested to dismiss the Player’s claim in its entirety.
34. The Club submitted that the claim is time-barred since it was submitted on 6 March 2025,
whereas the Player’s injury occurred on 13 November 2022 and surgery took place on 9
February 2023.
35. In addition, the Club argued it lacked standing to be sued, as the Player was on loan with
the Loanee Club at the time of the injury. In this respect, the Club emphasized that the
Player himself had directed his medical treatment requests to the Loanee Club.
36. The Club further argued that clause 3 of the Loan Agreement explicitly assigned
responsibility for the Player’s medical treatment to the Loanee Club.
37. With respect to the claimed salaries for the period between July and December 2023, the
Club emphasized that the Contract expired on 30 June 2023 and that any claim for salaries
beyond this date is unfounded.
pg. 8
REF. FPSD-18474
38. Regarding the flight tickets, the Club pointed out that the Player went to Brazil in January
2023 while still under contract with the Loanee Club, and without prior authorization. For
this reason, the Club argued that such costs did not fall within its obligations.
39. The Club requested the following relief (quoted verbatim):
“Based on the foregoing, the Respondent respectfully requests the Dispute Resolution
Chamber to:
1. Dismiss the Claim in its entirety on the grounds that it is time-barred and that Al Wasl is
not a proper respondent.
2. In the alternative, reject all claims for medical expense reimbursement, salary
compensation, and return ticket costs, as Al Wasl was not contractually responsible for the
Player during the relevant period.
3. Order the Claimant to bear all costs of the proceedings, including any legal fees incurred
by Al Wasl.
4. Dismiss any request for further financial or sporting sanctions against Al Wasl, as there is
no evidence of unjustified delay or breach of obligations under the RSTP.”
c. Additional submissions
40. On 16 April 2025, the FIFA general secretariat invited the Player to provide comments on
the latest correspondence of the Club by no later than 23 April 2025.
41. The Player submitted his additional comments on 24 April 2025 at 19:51 hrs local time in
São Paulo (Brazil).
42. On 1 May 2025, the FIFA general secretariat informed the Player that in accordance with
art. 11 par. 4 of the Procedural Rules Governing the Football Tribunal (hereinafter: the
Procedural Rules), “submissions and evidence filed outside the relevant time limit shall be
disregarded” and that his correspondence of 24 April 2025 was disregarded.
43. For the sake of completeness, since the Player did not provide additional comments, the
FIFA general secretariat did not invite the Club to provide final comments.
pg. 9
REF. FPSD-18474
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
44. 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 6 March 2025 and submitted for decision on
13 November 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.
45. Furthermore, the Chamber referred to art. 2 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules and observed
that in accordance with art. 23 par. 1 in combination with art. 22 par. 1 lit. b) of the
Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (hereinafter: the Regulations) (July 2025
edition), the Dispute Resolution Chamber is competent to deal with the matter at stake,
which concerns an employment-related dispute with an international dimension between
a Brazilian player and a Emirati club.
46. 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
47. Before entering into the merits of the dispute, the Chamber referred to art. 23 par. 3 of the
Regulations, which stipulates that the decision-making bodies of FIFA shall not hear any
dispute if more than two years have elapsed since the facts leading to the dispute arose.
48. In this context, the Chamber recalled that the present claim was lodged in front of FIFA on
6 March 2025. Therefore, in line with art. 23 par. 3 of the Regulations, any amounts fallen
due before 6 March 2023 are affected by the statute of limitations
49. With the above in mind, the Chamber observed that the Player lodged his claim requesting
(i) reimbursement of flight tickets, (ii) reimbursement of medical expenses, and (iii)
compensation.
50. In this regard, the Chamber pointed out that the reimbursement of medical expenses
arises from payments allegedly made on 9 March and 18 October 2023 and that the
claimed compensation arises from the period from July to December 2023. Therefore, the
Chamber considered that these claims are not time-barred.
pg. 10
REF. FPSD-18474
51. In continuation, the Chamber remarked that the Player is claiming the reimbursement for
flight tickets booked on 9 January 2023, alleging that such reimbursement was due upon
the Contract’s expiration, namely, 30 June 2023.
52. In this respect, the Chamber analysed the Contract and did not find any provision
stipulating that the flight tickets reimbursement should have been made on 30 June 2023.
53. The Chamber referred to the jurisprudence of the Football Tribunal, which establishes that
the right to reimbursement, if applicable, arises on the date on which the reimbursable
expense was incurred. In this case, that date was 9 January 2023.
54. In light of all the above, the Chamber interpreted that the reimbursement of flight tickets,
if applicable, was to be paid on 9 January 2023, and, therefore, this claim is time-barred
and inadmissible. Hence, the Chamber decided that the Player’s request for relief is
partially admissible.
c. Burden of proof
55. 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
56. 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
57. The Chamber then moved to the substance of the matter and took note of the fact that it
concerned a claim of a player against a club for reimbursement of medical expenses and
compensation.
58. The Chamber recalled the Player claimed to be entitled to the reimbursement of medical
and physiotherapy expenses for an injury sustained while playing with the Loanee Club, as
pg. 11
REF. FPSD-18474
well as compensation corresponding to the salaries he would have earned during the
period of incapacity following the expiry of his employment contract with the Club.
59. The Club, for its part, argued that it lacked standing to be sued since the medical
responsibility during the relevant period rested entirely with the Loanee Club. In addition,
it contended that any claim for salaries after the Contract’s expiration is devoid of legal
basis.
60. In this context, the Chamber acknowledged that its task was to determine whether (i) the
Club is liable for the Player’s medical expenses reimbursement; and (ii) if the Club should
compensate the Player for the time he was injured following the expiry of his employment
relationship with the Club.
i.
Is the Club liable for the Player’s medical expenses reimbursement?
61. As a starting point, the Chamber observed that the Player alleged that under the Contract,
he was entitled to insurance coverage not only during its term but also for the
consequences of injuries extending beyond its expiration.
62. The Chamber pointed out that the Player acknowledged that this insurance obligation was
suspended during the loan period, namely from 1 July 2022 to 31 May 2023, but maintained
that it resumed in full upon his return to the Club on 1 June 2023.
63. Additionally, the Chamber took note that the Player further referred to clause 3 of the Loan
Agreement, contending that this clause governed only the relationship between the two
clubs and did not affect his direct right to claim against the Club.
64. The Chamber observed that, conversely, the Club deemed that it is not the proper
respondent to this dispute since the Player’s injury occurred while he was on loan with the
Loanee Club.
65. The Chamber further took note that the Club contended that the Loan Agreement explicitly
placed responsibility for the Player’s medical treatment on the Loanee Club and that the
Player’s default notices were addressed to the Loanee Club, confirming his awareness of
this allocation of responsibility.
66. The Chamber considered noteworthy that standing to be sued is attributed to a party in
which it can be validly placed the legal consequences deriving from the rights brought
forward with a claim on the basis of a legally protectable and tangible interest at stake in
the matter concerned.
67. Additionally, the Chamber referred to art. 10 par. 1 lit c) of the Regulations, according to
which “During the agreed duration of the loan, the contractual obligations between the
professional and the former club shall be suspended unless otherwise agreed in writing.”.
pg. 12
REF. FPSD-18474
68. As a result, the Chamber considered that the Club would only have standing to be sued if
the contractual provisions expressly stipulated that its medical obligations under the
Contract remained in force during the loan period, that is, if the parties had otherwise
agreed in writing to derogate from the general suspension rule.
69. In continuation, the Chamber analysed the relevant contractual provisions on file, which
considered to be the following:
-
Clause 4.3 of the Contract provided as follows:
“It shall provide the Player with full insurance that covers the cases of disability and death
throughout the contract term with [the Club] in accordance with the regulation of United Arab
Emirates Football Association, player’s status transfers regulation. The insurance coverage
shall include the cases whose effects will extend after the contract expiration. According to
the regulation stipulated above, and in the event of player transfer or loan (to another
club or football company), [the Club] shall not be adhered to this item.”
(emphasis added)
-
Clause 3 of the Loan Agreement:
“[The Loanee Club] will be responsible for any injury that may occur to the player
during the loan period, also if the recovery and getting cured from the injury extends
after the loan duration. [The Loanee Club]recognizes and acknowledges that the player is
in perfect state of health for the provision of its services as a professional player as he passed
the medical test in United Arab Emirates, thus assuming the absolute liability for injuries
that may occur to the player, being in charge of [the Loanee Club], the expenses that require
medical attention until the final medication recovery, also till the player gets cured and able
to officially play and participate. [The Loanee Club] shall pay [the Club] the compensation
which shall cover any damages and/or losses that may happen to [the Club] as a sequence
of the player’s injury.”
(emphasis added)
70. In light of the foregoing, the Chamber concluded that clause 3 of the Loan Agreement
clearly assigned to the Loanee Club full responsibility for all medical expenses resulting
from injuries sustained during the loan period, even if treatment or recovery extended
beyond the loan duration. Likewise, the Chamber found that clause 4.3 of the Contract
expressly exempted the Club from its insurance obligations in the event of a loan.
71. Moreover, the Chamber found that the Player’s argument that the “hold harmless” clause
did not affect his direct claim against the Club could not prevail, given the explicit
pg. 13
REF. FPSD-18474
suspension of the Club’s obligations under clause 4.3 of the Contract and the unequivocal
transfer of liability under the Loan Agreement.
72. In addition, the Chamber wished to point out that it is not contested that the Player’s injury
occurred on 13 November 2022 and he underwent surgery on 9 February 2023, both
events occurring while the Player was on loan with the Loanee Club, during which period
the Club’s obligations towards him were contractually suspended.
73. The Chamber further noted that the Player initially addressed his complaints and demands
directly to the Loanee Club, which strongly indicates that he himself recognized that
medical responsibility rested with the Loanee Club.
74. In light of the foregoing, the Chamber concluded that the Club cannot be held liable for the
reimbursement of the Player’s medical expenses, given that:
-
The injury occurred within the loan period;
-
during the loan period the Club’s contractual obligations were expressly suspended;
and
-
the Loan Agreement unequivocally transferred full medical responsibility to the Loanee
Club.
75. In consequence, the Chamber rejected the Player’s claim for reimbursement.
ii. Should the Club compensate the Player for the time he was injured?
76. The Chamber further noted that the Player requested the Club to be held liable for salary
compensation for the period from July to December 2023, or at minimum, from July to
October 2023, when he was medically cleared to resume professional activity.
77. The Chamber observed that the Player alleged that the negligence of both the Club and the
Loanee Club resulted in a delay of nearly three months before he could undergo
reconstructive surgery, leaving him unable to compete until October 2023 and preventing
him from securing a new employment contract.
78. The Chamber noted that the Club, for its part, argued that any claim for salaries beyond 30
June 2023, i.e. the Contract’s expiration date, was unfounded.
79. After carefully analysing the arguments from both parties in this regard, the Chamber
found that the Player’s claim for post-contractual salaries lacks contractual or legal basis.
80. In consequence, the Chamber rejected the Player’s claim in this regard.
pg. 14
REF. FPSD-18474
iii. Conclusions
81. In light of all the above, the Chamber rejected the Player’s claim in its entirety without
prejudice to any potential action the Player may wish to pursue against the Loanee Club.
e. Costs
82. 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.
83. 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.
84. Lastly, the DRC concluded its deliberations by rejecting any other requests for relief made
by any of the parties.
pg. 15
REF. FPSD-18474
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Luiz Henrique Diniz da Rosa, is rejected.
2.
This decision is rendered without costs.
For the Football Tribunal:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
pg. 16
REF. FPSD-18474
NOTE RELATED TO THE APPEAL PROCEDURE:
According to art. 50 par. 1 of the FIFA Statutes, this decision may be appealed against before
the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) within 21 days of receipt of the notification of this
decision.
NOTE RELATED TO THE PUBLICATION:
FIFA may publish this decision. For reasons of confidentiality, FIFA may decide, at the request
of a party within five days of the notification of the motivated decision, to publish an
anonymised or a redacted version (cf., art. 17 of the Procedural Rules Governing the Football
Tribunal).
CONTACT INFORMATION
Fédération Internationale de Football Association – Legal & Compliance Division
396 Alhambra Circle, 6th floor, Coral Gables, Miami, Florida, USA 33134
legal.fifa.com | [email protected] | T: +41 (0)43 222 7777
pg. 17