Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF. FPSD-19421
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 14 August 2025
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the player Luka Gucek
COMPOSITION:
Clifford J. HENDEL (USA & France), Deputy Chairperson
Dana MOHAMED AL-NOAIMI (Qatar), Member
Michele COLUCCI (Italy), Member
CLAIMANT:
Luka Gucek, Slovenia
Represented by 14 Sports Law
RESPONDENT:
FC Vorskla Poltava, Ukraine
Represented by Berlin Sports Law
pg. 2
REF. FPSD-19421
I. Facts of the case
1.
On 11 July 2024, the Slovenian player Luka Gucek (hereinafter: the Claimant or the Player)
and the Ukrainian club FC Vorskla Poltava (hereinafter: the Respondent or the Club)
concluded an employment contract (hereinafter: the Contract) valid as from 12 July 2024
until 30 June 2026.
2.
In accordance with the Contract, the Respondent undertook to pay the Claimant a monthly
salary of USD 1,245.
3.
In addition, on 11 July 2024, the Claimant and the Respondent concluded an additional
agreement (hereinafter: the Agreement).
4.
The Agreement stipulated the following:
“[…] 1. For the performance of its obligations under the terms of the Contract, the Club pays a
monthly additional net payment to the Professional Football player in the amount of USD 9,500
(nine thousand five hundred).
In the event that the Professional Football Player in the football season will play in the starting
lineup of the Club’s main football team 15 (fifteen) official matches, the amount of additional
net payment from 16 (sixteen) game will be USD 11,000 (eleven thousand).
2. During the term of the contract, the Club pays the transfer (tickets) for the Professional
Football Player on the route Slovenia – Ukraine – Slovenis [sic] (from Slovenia to the location of
the football team and to Slovenia at the end of the football season)*.
The Club independently searches for a transfer (economy-class tickets, including one suitcase
(bag) of luggage), books such tickets, pays for them and provides them to the Professional
Football Player (taking into account the work schedules of the football team within the relevant
football season).
*Taking into account the specifics of transport connection with Ukraine, the tickets specified in
this will be purchased to the city closest to the border with Ukraine.
Within Ukraine the transfer may take place at the expense of the Club.
3. The Club pays the Professional Football Player during the period of this Contract the rental of
apartment (flat) in amount USD 300 (three hundred) / per month. […]”
5.
On 23 November 2024, the Claimant made his 15th appearance in the starting lineup of the
Respondent.
pg. 3
REF. FPSD-19421
6.
On 29 November 2024, the Claimant made his 16th appearance in the starting lineup of the
Respondent.
7.
On 12 May 2025, the Claimant put the Respondent in default and requested payment
within 15 days of USD 50,645, broken down as follows:
8.
•
USD 1,245 as the monthly salary of April 2025 pursuant to the Contract;
•
USD 1,500 as the remaining balance of the additional monthly salary of November
2024;
•
USD 1,500 as the remaining balance of the additional monthly salary of December
2024;
•
USD 44,000 as the entire additional monthly salaries of January, February, March
and April 2025; and
•
USD 2,400 as the monthly house allowance of USD 300 from September 2024 until
April 2025.
On 14 May 2025, the Respondent answered the Claimant’s default notice as follows:
“1. On July 11, 2024, Employment contract No. 50 was sign between Football Club "Vorskla" LLC
and Professional Football Player Luka Gucek, valid until June 30, 2026.
Throughout the entire term of the contract, the Football Club "Vorskla" fulfilled all its obligations
to the player.
2. At the beginning of 2025 illegal and unlawful sanctions were imposed against the general
sponsor of the Club (its shareholders) by the state of Ukraine, resulting in a difficult economic
situation. This resulted in financial delays in the fulfillment [sic] of contractual obligations.
3. We recognize that the club is indebted to the player USD 48 100 (forty-eight thousand one
hundred) based on the following calculation:
- October 2024 - USD 300 apartment,
- November 2024 - USO 300 apartment,
- December 2024- USO 1 000 /salary+ USD 300 apartment,
- January 2025 - USD 11 000 /salary+ USD 300 apartment,
- February 2025 - USD 11 000 /salary+ USO 300 apartment,
- March 2025 - USD 11 000 /salary+ USO 300 apartment,
- April 2025 - USO 11 000 / salary + USD 300 apartment (and USD 1245 to a bankcard, included
taxes).
pg. 4
REF. FPSD-19421
4. Taking into account the above, as well as the situation with the player that has arisen in the
team today, we offer you:
a. terminate the contract early, effective June 01, 2025,
b. agree on a schedule of payment of the club's debts in favor of the player, starting from June
20, 2025. […]”
9.
On the same day, i.e. 14 May 2025, the Claimant answered the latest correspondence from
the Respondent as follows:
“[…] At the outset, we refer to the Club’s correspondence dated 14 May 2025, wherein the
Respondent formally proposed the premature termination of the Employment Contract between
FC Vorskla Poltava and the Player. We must express our surprise at this development, as we were
anticipating the Club’s compliance with its contractual obligations through the timely settlement
of the outstanding payments identified in the Default Notice. As you are well aware, the Player
has enjoyed his time in Ukraine, having spent several years of his professional career in the
country. Accordingly, the Club’s ongoing non-compliance has caused considerable frustration
and disappointment for our Client, who had expected a continuation of his employment
relationship under the agreed terms.
With that being said, please be advised that Mr. Gucek’s principal intention remains to honor
his contractual commitments and to continue his employment relationship with FC Vorskla
Poltava. He has demonstrated professionalism and dedication throughout his tenure with the
Club and expects the same level of good faith and compliance with contractual obligations in
return, especially after taking into consideration his contribution and loyalty throughout the
entire season.
In any case, and as a token of goodwill, we remain open to scheduling a conference call in order
to explore an amicable resolution to the dispute at hand, with the ultimate goal of avoiding
further legal escalation. From our perspective, several critical issues require clarification and
understanding – as a paradigm, the method of payment to the Player in the event of a
settlement. To the best of our knowledge, Ukrainian clubs currently face tight banking
restrictions concerning international transactions. Accordingly, we would appreciate it if the
Club could provide clarity on how it intends to facilitate any payments owed to the Player
following his potential departure from Ukraine. This is particularly relevant given that, up to this
point, the Player’s salaries have been predominantly paid in cash.
Nonetheless, for the sake of clarity, we would like to provide the following remarks.
As a preliminary comment, we emphasize that any discussions regarding a potential settlement
of the present dispute are conducted strictly without prejudice to the deadline set forth in the
Default Notice dated 12 May 2025, which remains fully valid and binding upon the Club.
Furthermore, we reiterate that the total outstanding amount currently owed to the Player stands
at USD 50,645, as clearly substantiated and detailed in our prior correspondence.
pg. 5
REF. FPSD-19421
Lastly, it is imperative to stress that any potential discussion on settlement must duly account
for the fact that the Employment Contract remains valid until 30 June 2026, leaving one full
sporting season unfulfilled. Accordingly, the Club must also agree to compensate – at least in
part – the financial damages the Player stands to incur as a result of a premature termination
of the contractual relationship.
In light of the above, we hereby formally reject the proposal submitted in the Club’s Response
dated 14 May 2025.
We do thank you for taking notice of the above and we remain at your entire disposal for any
further information and/or clarification deemed necessary. […]”
10. On 28 May 2025, the Claimant terminated the Contract with the Respondent.
II. Proceedings before FIFA
11. On 29 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
12. In his claim, the Claimant argued that he terminated the Contract with just cause on 28
May 2025 due to outstanding remuneration. In this regard, the Claimant stated that, as
from 29 November 2024, his monthly salary pursuant to the Agreement increased to USD
11,000 net as he made his 16th appearance in the starting lineup of the Respondent.
13. In addition, the Claimant noted that on the date of termination of the Contract, i.e. 28 May
2025, his outstanding remuneration amounted to USD 62,353.66, which corresponds to:
•
USD 1,500 net as the remaining balance of the additional monthly salary of
November 2024 pursuant to the Agreement;
•
USD 1,500 net as the remaining balance of the additional monthly salary of
December 2024 pursuant to the Agreement;
•
USD 44,000 net as the entire additional monthly salaries of January, February, March
and April 2025 pursuant to the Agreement;
•
USD 1,245 as the monthly salary of April 2025 pursuant to the Contract;
•
USD 1,162 as the monthly salary from 1 May 2025 until 28 May 2025 pursuant to
the Contract;
pg. 6
REF. FPSD-19421
•
USD 10,266.66 net as the additional monthly salary from 1 May 2025 until 28 May
2025 pursuant to the Agreement; and
•
USD 2,680 as the monthly house allowances of USD 300 from September 2024 until
28 May 2025 pursuant to the Agreement.
14. The Claimant’s requests for relief were the following:
“(i) Determinate the present claim as admissible;
(ii) Adjudge that the Claimant terminated unilaterally the employment Contract and its
supplementary Agreement with just cause under FIFA Regulations;
(iii) Order the Respondent, FC Vorskla Poltava, to proceed with the payment of the outstanding
basic salaries to the Claimant which amount to USD 2.407 (two thousand four hundred seven
US dollars) gross, corresponding to the basic monthly salary of April 2025 and to the partial
basic monthly salary of 1-28 May 2025 pursuant to Clause 4.1 of the employment Contract;
(iv) Order the Respondent, FC Vorskla Poltava, to proceed with the payment of the outstanding
additional salaries to the Claimant which amount to USD 54.266,66 (fifty four thousand two
hundred sixty six US dollars and sixty six cents) net, corresponding to the additional monthly
salaries of January, February, March and April 2025 and to the partial additional monthly salary
of 1-28 May 2025 pursuant to Clause 1 of the employment Contract’s supplementary Agreement;
(v) Order the Respondent, FC Vorskla Poltava, to proceed with the payment of the overdue
house allowance to the Claimant which amounts to USD 2.680 (two thousand six hundred eighty
US dollars) net, corresponding to the house allowance from September 2024 to 28 May 2025,
pursuant to Clause 3 of the employment Contract’s supplementary Agreement;
(vi) Order the Respondent, FC Vorskla Poltava, to proceed with the payment of the compensation
to the Claimant which amounts to USD 16.268 (sixteen thousand two hundred sixty eight US
dollars) gross plus USD 143.733,34 (one hundred forty three thousand seven hundred thirty
three US dollars and thirty four cents) net, corresponding to residual value of the employment
Contract and its supplementary Agreement respectively, for their unilateral termination by the
Player, in accordance with Clause 4.1 of the Contract, Clause 1 of the Agreement and Art.17
RSTP; in case the Claimant finds a new employment during the course of the FIFA proceedings,
order the Respondent, FC Vorskla Poltava to proceed with the payment of the Mitigated and
Additional Compensation, in accordance with Art. 17 RSTP and the supra submission IV.B; as to
the calculation of the Additional Compensation, DRC shall take into consideration that the basic
monthly salary of the Claimant totalled in the gross amount of USD 1.245 (one thousand two
hundred forty five US dollars) and the additional monthly salary in the net amount of USD 11.000
(eleven thousand US dollars);
(vii) Determine that an interest rate of 5% per annum shall apply over the outstanding salaries
pg. 7
REF. FPSD-19421
and the compensation in accordance with the supra submission IV.D;
(viii) Implement the applicable sporting sanctions against the Respondent, FC Vorskla Poltava,
due to the breach of the employment Contract and its supplementary Agreement during the
Protected Period;
(ix) Order the Respondent, FC Vorskla Poltava to bear any and all legal costs as to the present
dispute.”
15. For the sake of completeness, the Claimant clarified his request for interest as follows:
“(i) As to the gross amount of USD 1.245 corresponding to the basic monthly salary of April 2025,
the starting date as to the pertinent calculation shall be 1 May 2025, until the date of the effective
payment;
(ii) As to the gross amount of USD 1.162 corresponding to the partial basic monthly salary of
May 2025 (1 to 28 May 2025), the starting date as to the pertinent calculation shall be 29 May
2025, until the date of the effective payment;
(iii) As to the net amount of USD 1.500 corresponding to the remaining balance of the additional
monthly salary of November 2024, the starting date as to the pertinent calculation shall be 1
December 2024, until the date of effective payment;
(iv) As to the net amount of USD 1.500 corresponding to the remaining balance of the additional
monthly salary of December 2024, the starting date as to the pertinent calculation shall be 1
January 2025, until the date of effective payment;
(v) As to the net amount of USD 11.000 corresponding to the additional monthly salary of
January 2025, the starting date as to the pertinent calculation shall be 1 February 2025, until
the date of effective payment;
(vi) As to the net amount of USD 11.000 corresponding to the additional monthly salary of
February 2025, the starting date as to the pertinent calculation shall be 1 March 2025, until the
date of effective payment;
(vii) As to the net amount of USD 11.000 corresponding to the additional monthly salary of March
2025, the starting date as to the pertinent calculation shall be 1 April 2025, until the date of
effective payment;
(viii) As to the net amount of USD 11.000 corresponding to the additional monthly salary of April
2025, the starting date as to the pertinent calculation shall be 1 May 2025, until the date of
effective payment;
pg. 8
REF. FPSD-19421
(ix) As to the net amount of USD 10.266,66 corresponding to the partial additional monthly
salary of May 2025 (1 to 28 May 2025), the starting date as to the pertinent calculation shall be
29 May 2025, until the date of effective payment;
(x) As to the gross amount of USD 16.268 corresponding to the residual value of the employment
Contract, the starting date as to the pertinent calculation shall be 29 May 2025, until the date
of effective payment;
(xi) As to the net amount of USD 143.733,34 corresponding to the residual value of the
employment Contract’s supplementary Agreement, the starting date as to the pertinent
calculation shall be 29 May 2025, until the date of effective payment;
(xii) As to the net amount of USD 2.680 corresponding to the house allowance from September
2024 to 28 May 2025, the starting date as to the pertinent calculation for each monthly
installment [sic] of USD 300 shall be the first day of the subsequent month, until the date of
effective payment.”
b. Position of the Respondent
16. Despite being invited to do so, the Respondent failed to reply to the claim.
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
17. 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 29 May 2025 and submitted for decision on
14 August 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.
18. 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), it is competent to deal with the matter at stake, which concerns an employmentrelated dispute with an international dimension between an Slovenian player and a
Ukrainian club.
19. 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
pg. 9
REF. FPSD-19421
Regulations, the July 2025 edition of the Regulations is applicable to the matter at hand as
to the substance.
b. Burden of proof
20. 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
21. 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
22. The Chamber then moved to the substance of the matter, and took note of the fact that,
according to the Claimant, he terminated the Contract with just cause due to outstanding
remuneration.
23. In addition, the Chamber noted that the Respondent did not respond to the claim, entailing
that its 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.
24. In this context, the Chamber acknowledged that its task was to determine, based on the
evidence presented by the parties, 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.
25. 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).
pg. 10
REF. FPSD-19421
26. In the present matter, the Chamber recalled that the Claimant put the Respondent in
default by requesting payment of USD 50,645, i.e. more than two monthly salaries, on 12
May 2025, at least 15 days before unilaterally terminating the Contract on 28 May 2025.
27. In continuation, the Chamber pointed out 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 Chamber observed that the Respondent
failed to provide any evidence to prove the payment of the amounts claimed as
outstanding by the Claimant.
28. Thus, the Chamber concluded that the Claimant had a just cause to unilaterally terminate
the Contract, based on art. 14bis of the Regulations.
ii. Consequences
29. Having stated the above, the Chamber turned its attention to the question of the
consequences of such unjustified breach of the Contract committed by the Respondent.
30. The Chamber observed that the Player’s outstanding remuneration at the time of
termination of the Contract, coupled with his specific requests for relief, are equivalent to
the following amounts:
•
USD 300, as the monthly house allowance for September 2024 pursuant to the
Agreement;
•
USD 300, as the monthly house allowance for October 2024 pursuant to the
Agreement;
•
USD 300, as the monthly house allowance for November 2024 pursuant to the
Agreement;
•
USD 1,500 net, as the remaining balance of the additional monthly salary of
November 2024 pursuant to the Agreement;
•
USD 300, as the monthly house allowance for December 2024 pursuant to the
Agreement;
•
USD 1,500 net, as the remaining balance of the additional monthly salary of
December 2024 pursuant to the Agreement;
•
USD 300, as the monthly house allowance for January 2025 pursuant to the
Agreement;
pg. 11
REF. FPSD-19421
•
USD 11,000 net, as the additional monthly salary of January 2025 pursuant to the
Agreement;
•
USD 300, as the monthly house allowance for February 2025 pursuant to the
Agreement;
•
USD 11,000 net, as the additional monthly salary of February 2025 pursuant to the
Agreement;
•
USD 300, as the monthly house allowance for March 2025 pursuant to the
Agreement;
•
USD 11,000 net, as the additional monthly salary of March 2025 pursuant to the
Agreement;
•
USD 300, as the monthly house allowance for April 2025 pursuant to the Agreement;
•
USD 1,245, as the monthly salary of April 2025 pursuant to the Contract;
•
USD 11,000 net, as the additional monthly salary of April 2025 pursuant to the
Agreement;
•
USD 11,000 net, as the additional monthly salary of May 2025 pursuant to the
Agreement;
•
USD 1,245, as the monthly salary of May 2025 pursuant to the Contract; and
•
USD 280, as the monthly house allowance for May 2025 pursuant to the Agreement.
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 outstanding
amounts under the Contract at the moment of its termination, i.e. USD 63,170.
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 from the following dates until the date
of effective payment:
•
5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 300 as from 1 October 2024;
•
5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 300 as from 1 November 2024;
•
5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 300 as from 1 December 2024;
pg. 12
REF. FPSD-19421
•
5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 1,500 net as from 1 December 2024;
•
5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 300 as from 1 January 2025;
•
5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 1,500 net as from 1 January 2025;
•
5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 300 as from 1 February 2025;
•
5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 11,000 net as from 1 February 2025;
•
5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 300 as from 1 March 2025;
•
5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 11,000 net as from 1 March 2025;
•
5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 300 as from 1 April 2025;
•
5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 11,000 net as from 1 April 2025;
•
5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 1,545 as from 1 May 2025;
•
5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 11,000 net as from 1 May 2025;
•
5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 11,000 net as from 29 May 2025;
•
5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 1,245 as from 29 May 2025; and
•
5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 280 as from 1 June 2025.
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 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.
pg. 13
REF. FPSD-19421
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
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 159,185 (i.e. the monthly salaries from June 2025 until
June 2026 pursuant to the Contract and the Agreement) serves as the basis for the
determination of the amount of compensation for breach of the 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.
39. Subsequently, 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 159,185 to the Claimant, 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 29 May 2025 until the date of effective
payment.
pg. 14
REF. FPSD-19421
iii. Compliance with monetary decisions
42. 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.
43. 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.
44. Therefore, bearing in mind the above, the DRC 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.
45. 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.
46. The DRC 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
47. 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.
48. 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.
49. Lastly, the DRC concluded its deliberations by rejecting any other requests for relief made
by any of the parties.
pg. 15
REF. FPSD-19421
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Luka Gucek, is partially accepted.
2.
The Respondent, FC Vorskla Poltava, must pay to the Claimant the following amounts:
- USD 63,170 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from the following
dates until the date of effective payment:
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 300 as from 1 October 2024;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 300 as from 1 November 2024;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 300 as from 1 December 2024;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 1,500 net as from 1 December 2024;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 300 as from 1 January 2025;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 1,500 net as from 1 January 2025;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 300 as from 1 February 2025;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 11,000 net as from 1 February 2025;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 300 as from 1 March 2025;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 11,000 net as from 1 March 2025;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 300 as from 1 April 2025;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 11,000 net as from 1 April 2025;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 1,545 as from 1 May 2025;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 11,000 net as from 1 May 2025;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 11,000 net as from 29 May 2025;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 1,245 as from 29 May 2025; and
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 280 as from 1 June 2025.
- USD 159,185 as compensation for breach of contract plus 5% interest p.a. as from 29
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.
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.
pg. 16
REF. FPSD-19421
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. 17
REF. FPSD-19421
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. 18