Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF. FPSD-19745
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 30 October 2025
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the player
Maroof Yusuf
BY:
Angela COLLINS (Australia)
CLAIMANT:
Maroof Yusuf, Nigeria
Represented by Sport Makers
RESPONDENT:
Nasiriyah Club, Iraq
pg. 2
REF. FPSD-19745
I. Facts of the case
1.
On 1 August 2024, the Nigerian player, Maroof Yusuf (hereinafter: the Player or the
Claimant), and the Iraqi club, Nasiriyah Club (hereinafter: the Club or the Respondent)
entered into an employment contract (hereinafter: the Contract) valid as from 1 September
2024 until 1 July 2025.
2.
In accordance with the Contract, the Respondent undertook to pay to the Claimant inter
alia IQD 5,000,000 as an advance payment, and a USD 5,000 monthly salary. The Player was
also entitled to housing fees and a round-trip flight ticket.
3.
On 10 December 2024, the Player sent the Club a communication entitled “Notice of
Payment” in which he alleged that he is entitled to IQD 5,000,000 as an advance payment
as well as USD 5,000 as a monthly salary. He claimed a payment of USD 23,810.48
corresponding to the advance payment and the salaries until 30 November 2024, granting
the Club a 15-day time limit to proceed with payment.
4.
On the same day, the Club answered requesting an extension of 25 days to proceed with
payment stating, quoted verbatim:
“Our club confirms its commitment to preserving the rights of the respected player Yousef
Ma'rouf, as he was contracted with us, and according to the contract signed by both
parties. Kindly agree to postpone the payment for a period of twenty-five (25) days, starting
from today, to provide the necessary funds to settle the player's dues.”
5.
On 13 June 2025, the Player sent the Termination Letter to the Club, stating that the Club
owed him USD 55,981 as outstanding remuneration for the months of August 2024 to May
2025, (USD 5,000 times 10 months from August 2024 to May 2025, plus the prorated salary
for the 13 days of June 2025) plus IQD 5,000,000 as a signing bonus which the Player says
is equivalent to USD 3,815.
II. Proceedings before FIFA
6.
On 29 June 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 Player submitted having sent the Club a “Notice of Payment”, on 10 December 2024,
but that even if the Club requested 25-day extension to pay the requested sums, it failed
to do so.
pg. 3
REF. FPSD-19745
8.
In that sense the Player affirmed that he terminated his Contract with just cause on 13 June
2025, by sending a Termination Letter.
9.
The Player made the following request for relief, quoted verbatim:
“1) Accept the Player’s Claim against the Respondent;
2) Consider the Respondent liable for breach of the Employment Contract;
3) Decide that the Respondent shall pay the Claimant the total USD 53,815 “Fifty-three
thousand and eight hundred and fifteen US Dollars” as outstanding salaries and the
amount of advance payment in accordance with the Contract;
1) Decide that the Respondent shall pay the Claimant the total USD 5,000 “Five
thousand US Dollars” as a compensation amounting the rest of the Contract value;
2) Decide that the Respondent shall pay the Claimant the total USD 30,000 “Thirty
thousand US Dollars” amounting to six months ‘salary corresponding the specificity
of sport;
3) Decide that the Respondent shall pay interests at a rate of five percent (5%) per
annum over the entire amounts requested from the due date of each payment until
the date of the effective payment.
4) Impose sporting sanctions on the Respondent by restricting the Club to register
any new players, either nationally or internationally, for two entire and consecutive
registration periods”
b. Position of the Respondent
10. The Club was notified of the claim on 16 July 2025, despite being provided with the
opportunity to do so, the Club has failed to answer within the requested delay, which
expired on 5 August 2025.
pg. 4
REF. FPSD-19745
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
11. First of all, the Single Judge of the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: the Single Judge)
analysed whether she was competent to deal with the case at hand. In this respect, she
took note that the present matter was presented to FIFA on 29 June 2025 and submitted
for decision on 30 October 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.
12. 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 an Iraqi club.
13. Subsequently, the Single Judge analysed which regulations should be applicable as to the
substance of the matter. In this respect, she 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
14. 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 she 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
15. 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 she will refer only to the facts, arguments and documentary evidence,
which she considered pertinent for assessing the matter at hand.
pg. 5
REF. FPSD-19745
i. Main legal discussion and considerations
16. The Single Judge then moved to the substance of the matter and took note of the fact that
the Player alleged that the Club failed to pay him his remuneration for the months of
August to May 2025 and therefore claimed that he terminated his contract with just cause
in accordance with art. 14bis of the Regulations.
17. In this context, the Single Judge acknowledged that her 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, and assess the consequences thereof.
18. First and foremost, the Single Judge noted that, since the Club failed to reply to the present
claim, her decision would be based upon the documentation on file, that is, the
argumentation and evidence filed by the Player in line with art. 14 par. 1 and 21, par. 1 of
the Procedural Rules.
19. The Single Judge 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 obligations.
20. The Single Judge noted that the Claimant claimed not having received his remuneration
corresponding to salaries of August 2024, September 2024, October 2024, November 2024,
December 2024, January 2025, February 2025, March 2025, April 2025 and May 2025 as
well as the signing bonus. Furthermore, the Single Judge noted that the Claimant has
provided written evidence of having put the Respondent in default on 10 December 2024,
i.e. at least 15 days before unilaterally terminating the Contract on 13 June 2025.
21. The Single Judge noted that in the notice of default, of 10 December 2024, the Player
claimed that he was not paid his salaries of September, October and November 2024,
which amounted to three months outstanding, and that on the same day the Club had
acknowledged that these amounts were outstanding, requesting a 25-day delay to pay.
22. Despite the six-month gap between the expiry of the 25-day extension and the Player’s
termination notice of 13 June 2025, it appears that the Player has met the requirements of
art. 14bis, namely that he had 2 months of salary outstanding when he sent the notice of
default and that he provided a 15-day delay to the Club to remedy its default.
23. The Single Judge 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, as the Respondent did not reply to the present claim, it did not
discharge its burden of proof of demonstrating that these amounts were paid.
24. Thus, the Single Judge concluded that the Claimant had just cause to unilaterally terminate
the Contract, based on art. 14bis of the Regulations.
pg. 6
REF. FPSD-19745
ii. Consequences
25. Having established the above, the Single Judge moved on to the analysis of the
consequences of the breach of contract committed by the Club.
26. The Single Judge observed that the Contract began on 1 September 2024, and that as such
the outstanding remuneration at the time of termination, coupled with the specific
requests for relief of the player, is equivalent to 9 monthly salaries under the Contract
(September 2024, October 2024, November 2024, December 2024, January 2025, February
2025, March 2025, April 2025 and May 2025), amounting to USD 45,000, in addition to an
advance payment of IQD 5,000,000.
27. As a consequence, and in accordance with the general legal principle of pacta sunt servanda,
the Single Judge 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 45,000 (i.e. 5 times USD 5,000), in addition to the sign-on fee IQD 5,000,000 which,
in absence of any due date, and by virtue of its denomination as an advance payment, the
Single Judge deemed to have been due on the date of signature of the Contract.
28. In addition, taking into consideration the Claimant’s request as well as the constant practice
of the Football Tribunal in this regard, the Single Judge decided to award the Claimant
interest at the rate of 5% p.a. on the outstanding amounts as from the first day of the
following month until the date of effective payment, for monthly salaries, and as from 2
August 2024 for the sign-on fee. The interest was thus awarded as follows:
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of IQD 5,000,000 as from 2 August 2024
until the date of effective payment;
- 5% interest over the amount of USD 5,000 as from 1 October 2024 until the
date of effective payment;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 5,000 as from 1 November 2024
until the date of effective payment;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 5,000 as from 1 December 2024 until
the date of effective payment;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 5,000 as from 1 January 2025 until
the date of effective payment;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 5,000 as from 1 February 2025 until
the date of effective payment;
pg. 7
REF. FPSD-19745
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 5,000 as from 1 March 2025 until
the date of effective payment;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 5,000 as from 1 April 2025 until the
date of effective payment;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 5,000 as from 1 May 2025 until the
date of effective payment; and
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 5,000 as from 1 June 2025 until the
date of effective payment.
29. Having stated the above, the Single Judge turned to the calculation of the amount of
compensation payable by the Respondent in the case at stake. In doing so, the Single Judge
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.
30. In application of the relevant provision, the Single Judge held that she 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
them in the event of breach of contract. In this regard, the Single Judge noted that the
parties the Contract did not contain such a clause.
31. As a consequence, the Single Judge 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 Single Judge 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) of the
Regulations).
32. Bearing in mind the foregoing as well as the claim of the Claimant, the Single Judge
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 Single Judge concluded that the amount of USD 5,000 (i.e., the full monthly salary of
June 2025) serves as the basis for the determination of the amount of compensation for
breach of contract.
33. In continuation, the Single Judge 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
pg. 8
REF. FPSD-19745
practice of the Football Tribunal 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.
34. As the Player did not sign a new employment contract before the end date of the Contract,
the Single Judge determined that he did not mitigate his damages. On account of all the
above-mentioned considerations and the specificities of the case at hand, the Single Judge
decided that the Respondent must pay the amount of USD 5,000 to the Claimant, which
was to be considered a reasonable and justified amount of compensation for breach of
contract in the present matter.
35. Lastly, taking into consideration the Claimant’s request as well as the constant practice of
the Football Tribunal in this regard, the Single Judge decided to award the Claimant interest
on said compensation at the rate of 5% p.a. as of 13 June 2025 until the date of effective
payment.
iii. Compliance with monetary decisions
36. 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.
37. 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.
38. 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.
39. 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.
40. 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.
pg. 9
REF. FPSD-19745
d. Costs
41. 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.
42. 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.
43. Lastly, the Single Judge concluded her deliberations by rejecting any other requests for
relief made by any of the parties.
pg. 10
REF. FPSD-19745
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Maroof Yusuf, is partially accepted.
2.
The Respondent, Nasiriyah Club, must pay to the Claimant the following amount(s):
- IQD 5,000,000 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 2 August 2024
until the date of effective payment;
- USD 45,000 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as follows:
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 5,000 as from 1 October 2024 until the date
of effective payment;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 5,000 as from 1 November 2024 until the date
of effective payment;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 5,000 as from 1 December 2024 until the date
of effective payment;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 5,000 as from 1 January 2025 until the date of
effective payment;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 5,000 as from 1 February 2025 until the date
of effective payment;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 5,000 as from 1 March 2025 until the date of
effective payment;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 5,000 as from 1 April 2025 until the date of
effective payment;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 5,000 as from 1 May 2025 until the date of
effective payment; and
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 5,000 as from 1 June 2025 until the date of
effective payment.
- USD 5,000 as compensation for breach of contract plus 5% interest p.a. as from 13 June
2025 until the date of effective payment.
3.
Any further claims of the Claimant are rejected.
pg. 11
REF. FPSD-19745
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. 12
REF. FPSD-19745
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. 13