Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF. FPSD-19303
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 21 August 2025
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the Player Carlos
Henrique Franca Freires
COMPOSITION:
Frans DE WEGER (The Netherlands), Chairperson
Andre DOS SANTOS MEGALE (Brazil), Member
Tomislav KASALO (Croatia), Member
CLAIMANT:
Carlos Henrique Franca Freires, Brazil
Represented by André Oliveira Teodoro Lopes
RESPONDENT:
Mohammedan Sporting Club, India
pg. 2
REF. FPSD-19303
I. Facts of the case
1.
On 1 June 2024, the Brazilian player, Carlos Henrique Franca Freires (hereinafter: the Player
or the Claimant), and the Indian club, Mohammedan Sporting Club (hereinafter: the Club or
the Respondent) entered into an employment contract (hereinafter: the Contract) valid as
from 1 July 2024 until 31 May 2026.
2.
Clause 1.1. and 1.2 of Schedule I of the Contract read as follows:
“Season 2024-25: In consideration of the Player performing his services under this Agreement
between 1st July, 2024 and 31st May 2025, the Player shall be paid a Net Club Fee of USD
140,000/- (United States Dollars One Hundred Forty Thousand only Net) exclusive of
applicable direct and indirect taxes (including Goods and Services Tax (”GST”)) by the
Company, where the player is entitled to USD 25,000 advance salary upon arrival to Club
headquarters post clearing the medical and fitness tests conducted by the club in July 2024.
The rest of the remuneration will be paid in 10 (Ten) equal monthly instalments of USD
11,500/- net per month to be paid from 1st August 2024 to 31 May 2025 between the 1st to
10th day of the subsequent month after the month for which the payment is being made.
1.2. Season 2025-26: In consideration of the Player performing his services under this
Agreement between 1st July, 2025 and 31st May 2026, the Player shall be paid a Net Club Fee
of USD 180,000/- (United States Dollars One Hundred Eighty Thousand only Net) exclusive of
applicable direct and indirect taxes (including Goods and Services Tax (”GST”)) by the
Company, where the player is entitled to USD 25,000 advance salary upon arrival to Club
physically. The rest of the remuneration will be paid in 10 (Ten) equal monthly instalments of
USD 15,500/- net per month to be paid from 1st August 2025 to 31 May 2026 between the 1st
to 10th day of the subsequent month after the month for which the payment is being made.”
3.
Clause 2.1 par. ix of the of Schedule I of the Contract read as follows:
“Club to pay an additional INR 25,000 gross monthly to the player for food allowance and
domestic allowance for DTH, Television, WIFI, Gas, Electricity subscription monthly.”
4.
Clause 3 of Schedule I of the Contract read as follows:
“All amounts paid under this clause “Bonus”, shall be exclusive of all applicable direct and
indirect taxes. All bonuses are limited to ISL & Super Cup only for both the seasons:
a. USD 400 per goal & assist.
b. USD 400 per win (subject to the player being part of Starting 11).
c. USD 200 per win (subject to the player coming on as substitute and playing minimum 30
mins).
d. ISL 2024-25 & ISL 2025-26 Shield Champions: USD 9,000.
e. ISL 2024-25 & ISL 2025-26 Shield Runners: USD 6,000.
f. ISL 2024-25 & ISL 2025-26 Cup Champions: USD 9,000.
pg. 3
REF. FPSD-19303
g. ISL 2024-25 & ISL 2025-26 Cup Runners: USD 6,000.
h. Super Cup 2024-25 & Super Cup 2025-26 Champions: USD 6,000.”
5.
On 30 January 2025, the Claimant put the Respondent in default, requesting payment of
USD 24,088.46 within 15 days (hereinafter: the first default notice). This amount corresponds
to the following: salaries for the months of November and December 2024, each
amounting to USD 11,500, allowance amount for the month of December of USD 288.46,
and two win match bonuses, each valued at USD 400.
6.
On 25 April 2025, the Claimant put the Respondent in default, requesting payment of USD
37,253.84 within 15 days (hereinafter: the second default notice). This amount corresponds
to the following: USD 1,088.46, representing the remaining balance due from the first
default notice; salaries for the months of January, February, and March 2025, each
amounting to USD 11,500; allowance salaries for the same period, each amounting to USD
288.46; and two win match bonuses, each valued at USD 400.
7.
On 11 May 2025, the Claimant sent the Respondent a termination notice mentioning that
the salaries remained unpaid.
8.
The Player informed FIFA that he remained unemployed following the termination of the
Contract.
II. Proceedings before FIFA
9.
On 20 May 2025, the Claimant filed the claim at hand before FIFA. A summary of the parties’
respective positions is detailed below.
a. Claim of the Claimant
10. The Player argued that he had just cause to terminate the Contract in accordance with art.
14bis of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (hereinafter: the Regulations).
The Claimant mentioned that the following amounts remained unpaid:
- Monthly salaries between January and April 2025 (USD 11,500 each): USD 46,000
- Prorated May 2025 salary (11 days): USD 4,080.65
- Monthly allowances between December 2024 and April 2025 (USD 288.46 each): USD
1,442.30
- Prorated May 2025 allowance (11 days): USD 102.36
- Performance Bonuses (win vs Chennaiyin FC: USD 400.00; win vs Bengaluru FC: USD
400, goal vs East Bengal FC: USD 400, and assist vs Punjab FC: USD 400): USD 1,600
pg. 4
REF. FPSD-19303
11. As to the compensation, he requested the following:
- Prorated May 2025 salary (11 days): USD 7,419.35
- Prorated May 2025 allowance (11 days): USD 188.75
- Salaries for season 2025/2026: USD180,000
- Allowances for season 2025/2026: USD 3,510.72
12. The Claimant requested the following relief:
“a) Deems the present claim admissible, and accepts it in full;
b) Acknowledges that the Player had just cause to terminate the Employment Agreement;
c) Orders the Respondent to pay the Player the following amounts:
1. USD 191,118.82 (one hundred and ninety-one thousand, one hundred and eighteen US
Dollars and eighty- two cents) as compensation, plus 5% p.a. as interest as from 12 May 2025;
2. USD 11,500 (eleven thousand and five hundred US Dollars) as the salary of January 2025,
plus 5% p.a. as interest as from 11 February 2025;
3. USD 11,500 (eleven thousand and five hundred US Dollars) as the salary of February 2025,
plus 5% p.a. as interest as from 11 March 2025;
4. USD 11,500 (eleven thousand and five hundred US Dollars) as the salary of March 2025,
plus 5% p.a. as interest as from 11 April 2025;
5. USD 11,500 (eleven thousand and five hundred US Dollars) as the salary of April 2025, plus
5% p.a. as interest as from 11 May 2025;
6. USD 4,080.65 (four thousand and eight US Dollars and sixty-five cents) as the proportional
salary of May 2025, plus 5% p.a. as interest as from 12 May 2025;
7. USD 102,36 (one hundred and two US Dollars and thirty-six cents) as the proportional
monthly allowance of May 2025, plus 5% p.a. interest as from 12 May 2025;
8. USD 288.46 (two hundred and eighty-eight US Dollars and forty-six cents) as the monthly
allowance of December 2024, plus 5% p.a. interest as from 11 January 2025;
pg. 5
REF. FPSD-19303
9. USD 288.46 (two hundred and eighty-eight US Dollars and forty-six cents) as the monthly
allowance of January 2025, plus 5% p.a. interest as from 11 February 2025;
10. USD 288.46 (two hundred and eighty-eight US Dollars and forty-six cents) as the monthly
allowance of February 2025, plus 5% p.a. interest as from 11 March 2025;
11. USD 288.46 (two hundred and eighty-eight US Dollars and forty-six cents) as the monthly
allowance of March 2025, plus 5% p.a. interest as from 11 April 2025;
12. USD 288.46 (two hundred and eighty-eight US Dollars and forty-six cents) as the monthly
allowance of April 2025, plus 5% p.a. interest as from 11 May 2025;
13. USD 400 (four hundred US Dollars) as winning bonus (starting eleven) concerning the
match against Chennaiyin FC, plus 5% p.a. interest as from 27 September 2024;
14. USD 400 (four hundred US Dollars) as winning bonus (starting eleven) concerning the
match against Bengaluru FC, plus 5% p.a. interest as from 12 January 2025;
15. USD 400 (four hundred US Dollars) as goal bonus concerning the match against East
Bengal FC, plus 5% p.a. interest as from 17 February 2025; and
16. USD 400 (four hundred US Dollars) as assist bonus concerning the match against Punjab
FC, plus 5% p.a. interest as from 11 March 2025.
40. Given the lack of prima facie complex facts or legal issues of this matter, and the existence
of clearly established jurisprudence concerning FIFA’s jurisdiction, it is also requested that
FIFA’s general secretariat issues a proposal to finalize the matter, as per art. 20.1 of the
Procedural Rules Governing the Football Tribunal”
b. Position of the Respondent
13. Despite being invited, the Respondent failed to provide its position to the claim.
pg. 6
REF. FPSD-19303
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
14. 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 20 May 2025 and submitted for decision on
21 August 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.
15. 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 an Indian club.
16. 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. Burden of proof
17. 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
18. 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-19303
i. Main legal discussion and considerations
19. The foregoing having been established, the Chamber moved to the substance of the
matter, and took note of the fact this is a claim of a player against a club for breach of
contract, based on the alleged non-payment of certain financial obligations by the
Respondent as per the Contract in accordance with art. 14bis of the Regulations.
20. The Chamber also observed that Club did not respond to the claim, entailing that the
Chamber’s decision must be made on the basis of the documentation on file, that is, the
argumentation and evidence filed by the Claimant in line with art. 14 par. 1 and 21, par. 1
of the Procedural Rules.
21. In this context, the Chamber acknowledged that its task was to determine, based on the
evidence presented, whether the claimed amounts had in fact remained unpaid by the
Respondent and, if so, whether the formal pre-requisites of art. 14bis of the Regulations
had in fact been fulfilled.
22. The Chamber then referred to the wording of art. 14bis par. 1 of the Regulations, in
accordance with which, if a club unlawfully fails to pay a player at least two monthly salaries
on their due dates, the player will be deemed to have a just cause to terminate his contract,
provided that he has put the debtor club in default in writing and has granted a deadline
of at least 15 days for the debtor club to fully comply with its financial obligation(s).
23. The Chamber noted that the Claimant claims not having received at least his salaries for
the months of January, February, and March. Furthermore, the Chamber noted that the
Claimant has provided written evidence of having put the Respondent in default on 25 April
2025, i.e. at least 15 days before unilaterally terminating the contract on 11 May 2025.
24. Moreover, the Chamber mentioned that, considering the salaries were due between the
1st and 10th day of the following month, as of the date of the second default notice, the
salaries corresponding to the months of January to March were already due.
25. The Chamber also noted that in the case at hand the Respondent bore the burden of
proving that it indeed complied with the financial terms of the contract concluded between
the parties. Nonetheless, the Respondent did not reply to the claim and therefore failed to
provide any evidence.
26. Thus, the Chamber concluded that the Claimant had a just cause to unilaterally terminate
the contract, based on art. 14bis of the Regulations.
pg. 8
REF. FPSD-19303
ii. Consequences
27. 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.
28. The Chamber noted that the outstanding remuneration at the time of termination
amounted to USD 46,000, corresponding to unpaid salaries for the period between January
2025 and April 2025, USD 11,500 per month.
29. With regard to the additional monthly allowance for the period from December 2024 to
April 2025, the Chamber observed that such payments were contractually stipulated (cf.
clause 2.1, par. ix of Schedule I). Although the Claimant requested these amounts in USD,
the Chamber decided to award them in the currency specified in the Contract. Accordingly,
the Chamber awarded INR 25,000 per month.
30. The Chamber further considered the Claimant’s request for various match bonuses. While
acknowledging that the bonuses were contractually agreed, the Chamber emphasized that
they were conditional in nature. As the Claimant failed to provide any supporting evidence
to demonstrate entitlement to these bonuses, the Chamber concluded that the Claimant
did not discharge the burden of proof. Consequently, this part of the claim was rejected.
31. 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. USD
46,000 and INR 125,000.
32. 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
at the rate of 5% p.a. on the outstanding amounts as follows:
-
On the amount of INR 25,000 as from 11 January 2025 until the date of effective
payment;
-
On the amount of USD 11,500 and INR 25,000 as from 11 February 2025 until the date
of effective payment;
-
On the amount of USD 11,500 and INR 25,000 as outstanding remuneration plus 5%
interest p.a. as from 11 March 2025 until the date of effective payment;
-
On the amount of USD 11,500 and INR 25,000 as from 11 April 2025 until the date of
effective payment;
-
On the amount of USD 11,500 and INR 25,000 as from 11 May 2025 until the date of
effective payment.
pg. 9
REF. FPSD-19303
33. 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.
34. In application of the relevant provision, the Chamber held that it first of all ha d 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.
35. 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).
36. 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 USD 191,500 (USD 11,500 (May salary) plus USD 180,000
(season 25/26)) and INR 325,000 (13 monthly allowances of INR 25,000) serves as the basis
for the determination of the amount of compensation for breach of contract.
37. 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.
38. In this respect, the Chamber noted that the Player remained unemployed since the
unilateral termination of the contract.
pg. 10
REF. FPSD-19303
39. The Chamber referred to art. 17 par. 1 lit. ii) of the Regulations, according to which, in case
the Player did not sign any new contract following the termination of his previous contract,
as a general rule, the compensation shall be equal to the residual value of the contract that
was prematurely terminated.
40. 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
USD 191,500 and INR 325,000 which was to be considered a reasonable and justified
amount of compensation for breach of contract in the present matter.
41. 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 12 May 2025 until the date of effective
payment.
iii. Consequences of art. 17 par. 4 of the Regulations
42. 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.
43. 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”.
44. In this respect, the Chamber took note that the Player was born on 9 February 1992 and
the relevant contract with the Club was concluded on 1 June 2024. Furthermore, the
Chamber noted that the Player terminated the contract with just cause on 11 May 2025.
The breach of contract by the Club had therefore occurred within the protected period.
45. Furthermore, the Chamber noted that the Club had already been held liable for breaching
other players’ contracts without just cause in several recent occasions; in particular, in
cases FPSD-18725, FPSD-18798 and FPSD-17850.
46. 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-19303
iv. Compliance with monetary decisions
47. 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.
48. 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.
49. 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.
50. 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.
51. 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.
52. The Respondent shall make full payment (including all appliable 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.
d. Costs
53. 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.
pg. 12
REF. FPSD-19303
54. 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.
55. Lastly, the DRC concluded its deliberations by rejecting any other requests for relief made
by any of the parties.
pg. 13
REF. FPSD-19303
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Carlos Henrique Franca Freires, is partially accepted.
2.
The Respondent, Mohammedan Sporting Club, must pay to the Claimant the following
amount(s):
-
USD 11,500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 11 February
2025 until the date of effective payment;
USD 11,500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 11 March
2025 until the date of effective payment;
USD 11,500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 11 April 2025
until the date of effective payment;
USD 11,500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 11 May 2025
until the date of effective payment;
INR 25,000 as outstanding amount plus 5% interest p.a. as from 11 January 2025
until the date of effective payment;
INR 25,000 as outstanding amount plus 5% interest p.a. as from 11 February 2025
until the date of effective payment;
INR 25,000 as outstanding amount plus 5% interest p.a. as from 11 March 2025 until
the date of effective payment;
INR 25,000 as outstanding amount plus 5% interest p.a. as from 11 April 2025 until
the date of effective payment;
INR 25,000 as outstanding amount plus 5% interest p.a. as from 11 May 2025 until
the date of effective payment;
USD 191,500 and INR 325,000 as compensation for breach of contract plus 5%
interest p.a. as from 12 May 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.
The Respondent shall be banned from registering any new players, either nationally
or internationally, for the two next entire and consecutive registration periods
following the notification of the present decision.
6.
If full payment is not made within 30 days of notification of this decision, the present matter
shall be submitted, upon request of the Claimant, to the FIFA Disciplinary Committee.
pg. 14
REF. FPSD-19303
7.
This decision is rendered without costs.
For the Football Tribunal:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
pg. 15
REF. FPSD-19303
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. 16