Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF. FPSD-19127
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 18 July 2025
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the player Jordan
Kadiri
BY:
Michele COLUCCI (Italy)
CLAIMANT:
Jordan Kadiri, Nigeria
Represented by Nir Inbar
RESPONDENT:
AFC UTA Arad, Romania
pg. 2
REF. FPSD-19127
I. Facts of the case
1.
On 1 July 2024, the Nigerian player, Jordan Kadiri (hereinafter: the Player or the Claimant),
and the Romanian club, AFC UTA Arad (hereinafter: the Club or the Respondent) entered into
an employment contract (hereinafter: the Contract) valid as from 1 July 2024 until 30 June
2025.
2.
In accordance with the Contract, the Respondent undertook to pay to the Claimant a RON
45,000 monthly remuneration.
3.
On 15 December 2024, the Claimant and the Respondent concluded a mutual termination
agreement of the Contract (hereinafter: the Termination Agreement).
4.
The Termination Agreement reads as follows (quoted verbatim):
“1. AFC UTA Arad, represented by Florian Voinea, acting as president,
And
2. The professional Player Jordan Attah Kadiri, born on 11.03.2000, possessor of passport
PNGA B50175916,
Agree:
1. The mutual termination of the Sports Activity Contract no. 201/12.08.2024 starting with
15.12.2024.
2. The Club will pay the Player the netto amount of 100,000 Lei in two tranches as follows:
-
Tranche 1, in the netto amount of 50,000 Lei until the date of 10.01.2025;
-
Tranche 2, in the netto amount of 50,000 Lei until the date of 31.03.2025. A penalty of
1% will be applied for each day of delay.
3. The parts do not have any financial or any other nature claims one against each other,
excepting the ones mentioned in the present Agreement.”
5.
On 21 April 2025, the Claimant put the Respondent on default and requested the payment
of RON 50,000 corresponding to the second instalment of the Termination Agreement and
a penalty in the amount of RON 21,000, setting a 10 days’ time limit in order to remedy the
default.
pg. 3
REF. FPSD-19127
II. Proceedings before FIFA
6.
On 5 May 2025, the Claimant filed the claim at hand before FIFA. A summary of the parties’
respective positions is detailed below.
a. Position of the Claimant
7.
The Claimant lodged a claim against the Respondent for overdue payables.
8.
In his claim, the Claimant alleged that the Respondent failed to pay the second instalment
of the Termination Agreement due on 31 March 2025.
9.
The Claimant further asserted that the 1% daily penalty, i.e. RON 1,000 per day, was
voluntarily agreed upon by the parties and constitutes a proportional and reasonable
amount.
10. The Claimant’s requests for relief were the following:
“FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber is respectfully asked by the Claimant to rule the following:
1.1 The claim of the Claimant is accepted.
1.2 The Respondent has to pay the Claimant the following amounts:
1.2.1 Overdue Payable for the Second Payment in the amount of LEI 50,000 plus 5% interest
p.a as from 31 March 2025 until effective payment;
1.2.2 Agreed penalty in the amount of LEI 1.000 for every day of delay as from 31 March 2025
until effective payment;
1.3 A sanction according to article 12bis of the FIFA RSTP is imposed on the Respondent.”
b. Position of the Respondent
11. In its reply, the Respondent rejected the proposal sent by the FIFA general secretariat to
settle this matter yet failed to provide any defence or supporting arguments in this regard.
pg. 4
REF. FPSD-19127
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
12. First of all, the Single Judge of the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: the Single Judge)
analysed whether he was competent to deal with the case at hand. In this respect, he took
note that the present matter was presented to FIFA on 5 May 2025 and submitted for
decision on 18 July 2025. Taking into account the wording of arts. 31 and 34 of the January
2025 edition of the Procedural Rules Governing the Football Tribunal (hereinafter: the
Procedural Rules), the aforementioned edition of the Procedural Rules is applicable to the
matter at hand.
13. Furthermore, the Single Judge referred to art. 2 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules and observed
that in accordance with art. 23 par. 1 in combination with art. 22 par. 1 lit. b) of the
Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (hereinafter: the Regulations) (July 2025
edition), the Single Judge is competent to deal with the matter at stake, which concerns an
employment-related dispute with an international dimension between a Nigerian player
and a Romanian club.
14. Subsequently, the Single Judge analysed which regulations should be applicable as to the
substance of the matter. In this respect, he confirmed that, in accordance with art. 29 of
the Regulations, the July 2025 edition of the Regulations is applicable to the matter at hand
as to the substance.
b. Burden of proof
15. The Single Judge recalled the basic principle of burden of proof, as stipulated in art. 13
par. 5 of the Procedural Rules, according to which a party claiming a right on the basis of
an alleged fact shall carry the respective burden of proof. Likewise, the Single Judge
stressed the wording of art. 13 par. 4 of the Procedural Rules, pursuant to which he 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
16. Having established the competence and the applicable regulations, the Single Judge
entered into the merits of the dispute. In this respect, the Single Judge started by
acknowledging all the above-mentioned facts as well as the arguments and the
documentation on file. However, the Single Judge emphasised that in the following
considerations he will refer only to the facts, arguments and documentary evidence, which
he considered pertinent for assessing the matter at hand.
pg. 5
REF. FPSD-19127
i. Main legal discussion and considerations
17. The Single Judge then moved to the substance of the matter, stating that it concerned a
claim for outstanding remuneration brought by the Claimant against the Respondent on
the basis of a termination agreement.
18. The Single Judge found the Claimant requested the payment of RON 50,000 plus interest,
as well as a penalty of RON 1,000 for each day of delay starting from 31 March 2025 until
the date of effective payment.
19. In light of the above, the Single Judge established that in the case at hand the Respondent
bore the burden of proving that it indeed complied with the financial terms of the
termination agreement concluded between the parties.
20. Nevertheless, the Single Judge underlined that the Respondent had failed to discharge his
burden of proof.
21. As a consequence, and in accordance with the general principle of pacta sunt servanda, the
Single Judge decided that the Respondent is liable to pay to the Claimant the principal
amount of RON 50,000.
22. The Single Judge subsequently analysed the penalty clause contained in the Termination
Agreement, which stipulated that the Respondent should pay the Claimant a daily penalty
of 1% for delay in payment.
23. In this respect, the Single Judge recalled that, in accordance with the well-established
jurisprudence of the Football Tribunal, penalty clauses may be freely entered into by
contractual parties and may be considered acceptable, in the event that the pertinent
written clause meets certain criteria, such as proportionality and reasonableness. The
Single Judge further highlighted that whenever the payment of a penalty is triggered in
connection with a default of payment that persist in time (i.e., it is not only paid once but
increases over time with the non-payment), these obligations tend to be considered as
hidden interest rates rather than penalties – and are to be limited to a rate of 18% per
annum.
24. While applying the above to the present case, the Single Judge considered that a “penalty”
of 1% per day (i.e., hidden interest) would amount to 365% per year, which he considered
to be disproportionate and excessive in light of the standard practice of the Football
Tribunal.
25. In view of the foregoing, the Single Judge decided that the interest rate provided in the
Termination Agreement should be reduced to the maximum of 18% per annum in principle
as from the due date until the date of effective payment.
pg. 6
REF. FPSD-19127
26. Consequently, the Single Judge decided to award 18% interest p.a. over the amount of RON
50,000 as from 1 April 2025 until the date of effective payment.
ii. Compliance with monetary decisions
27. Finally, taking into account the applicable Regulations, the Single Judge referred to art. 24
par. 1 and 2 of the Regulations, which stipulate that, with its decision, the pertinent FIFA
deciding body shall also rule on the consequences deriving from the failure of the
concerned party to pay the relevant amounts of outstanding remuneration and/or
compensation in due time.
28. In this regard, the Single Judge highlighted that, against clubs, the consequence of the
failure to pay the relevant amounts in due time shall consist of a ban from registering any
new players, either nationally or internationally, up until the due amounts are paid. The
overall maximum duration of the registration ban shall be of up to three entire and
consecutive registration periods.
29. Therefore, bearing in mind the above, the Single Judge decided that the Respondent must
pay the full amount due (including all applicable interest) to the Claimant within 45 days of
notification of the decision, failing which, at the request of the Claimant, a ban from
registering any new players, either nationally or internationally, for the maximum duration
of three entire and consecutive registration periods shall become immediately effective on
the Respondent in accordance with art. 24 par. 2, 4, and 7 of the Regulations.
30. The Respondent shall make full payment (including all applicable interest) to the bank
account provided by the Claimant in the Bank Account Registration Form, which is attached
to the present decision.
31. The Single Judge recalled that the above-mentioned ban will be lifted immediately and prior
to its complete serving upon payment of the due amounts, in accordance with art. 24 par.
8 of the Regulations.
d. Costs
32. The Single Judge referred to art. 25 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules, according to which
“Procedures are free of charge where at least one of the parties is a player, coach, football agent,
or match agent”. Accordingly, the Single Judge decided that no procedural costs were to be
imposed on the parties.
33. Likewise, and for the sake of completeness, the Single Judge recalled the contents of art.
25 par. 8 of the Procedural Rules and decided that no procedural compensation shall be
awarded in these proceedings.
pg. 7
REF. FPSD-19127
34. Lastly, the Single Judge concluded his deliberations by rejecting any other requests for
relief made by any of the parties.
pg. 8
REF. FPSD-19127
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Jordan Kadiri, is partially accepted.
2.
The Respondent, AFC UTA Arad, must pay to the Claimant the following amount:
- RON 50,000 as outstanding remuneration plus 18% interest p.a. as from 1 April 2025
until the date of effective payment.
3.
Any further claims of the Claimant are rejected.
4.
Full payment (including all applicable interest) shall be made to the bank account indicated
in the enclosed Bank Account Registration Form.
5.
Pursuant to art. 24 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players, if full payment
(including all applicable interest) is not made within 45 days of notification of this decision,
the following consequences shall apply:
1. The Respondent shall be banned from registering any new players, either nationally or
internationally, up until the due amount is paid. The maximum duration of the ban shall
be of up to three entire and consecutive registration periods.
2. The present matter shall be submitted, upon request, to the FIFA Disciplinary Committee
in the event that full payment (including all applicable interest) is still not made by the
end of the three entire and consecutive registration periods.
6.
The consequences shall only be enforced at the request of the Claimant in accordance
with art. 24 par. 7 and 8 and art. 25 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players.
7.
This decision is rendered without costs.
For the Football Tribunal:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
pg. 9
REF. FPSD-19127
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. 10