Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF. FPSD-20408
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 10 October 2025
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning
the player Strahil Popov
BY:
Dana MOHAMED AL-NOAIMI, Qatar
CLAIMANT:
Strahil Popov, Bulgaria
Represented by Muhammed Emin Ozkurt
RESPONDENT:
Eminevim Umraniyespor, Türkiye
Represented by Ercan Sevdimbaş
pg. 2
REF. FPSD-20408
I. Facts of the case
1.
On 8 September 2022, the Bulgarian player, Strahil Popov (hereinafter: the Player or the
Claimant), and the Turkish club, Eminevim Umraniyespor (hereinafter: the Club or the
Respondent), entered into an employment contract (hereinafter: the First Contract) valid as
from the date of signature until 31 May 2023.
2.
According to clause 3 of the First Contract, the Player was entitled to the following amounts
(quoted verbatim):
“Legal Minimum Wage (included in the below-given remunerations)
2022/2023 Season Appearance Fee
The Club shall pay an appearance fee of net 1 000-EUR (one thousand five hundred
euros) to the Player during the 2022/2023 season for every official match that the Player
takes part in the match squad.
In case the Player is fielded in the first 11 the Club shall pay the Player %100 of the
Appearance Fee.
In case the Player is substituted in afterwards the Club shall pay the Player %75 of the
Appearance Fee.
In case the Player is not fielded the Club shall pay %50 of the Appearance Fee.
The Appearance fees shall be calculated on a monthly basis and shall be paid by the Club
on the last day of each month.”
3.
On 1 July 2023, the parties concluded a new employment contract (hereinafter: the Second
Contract) valid as from the date of signature until 30 June 2024.
4.
According to clause 3 of the Second Contract, the Player was entitled to the following
amounts:
“For 2023/2024 Football Season:
70.000.-EUR NET will be paid in total in ten equal instalments between August 2023 - May
2024 as 7.000.-EUR for each month. Payments can made until the last day of each
month.”
5.
During the 2022/2023 season, the Player played 21 matches for the Club as part of the
starting eleven, two matches as a substitute, and was not fielded in nine matches.
pg. 3
REF. FPSD-20408
6.
On 18 August 2023, the Club paid the Player EUR 20,000 as “match payment”.
7.
On 28 November 2023, the Player received a check dated 5 February 2024 for TRY 383,000
and another check dated 8 May 2024 for TRY 500,000.
8.
On the same date, the parties concluded a document stating (quoted verbatim):
“For the set-off arising from the Professional Player Contract, the current effective buying
rate of the Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey has been taken as 31 TL. If the EUR/TL
exchange rate on the payment date of the check on the due date is higher than today,
the difference will be calculated and paid to the player by the club.”
9.
On 8 December 2023, the Club paid the Player EUR 10,000 as a “December-January salary
payment”.
10. On 19 January 2024, the Club paid the Player EUR 3,500 as a “January salary payment”.
11. On 1 August 2025, the Player put the Club in default and requested payment of EUR
33,356.83, of which EUR 5,356.83 corresponded to the balance for January 2024 and EUR
28,000 for each of the salaries for February, March, April and May 2024. The Player granted
the Club 10 days to comply with the payment.
II. Proceedings before FIFA
12. On 19 August 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
13. The Player contended that the parties concluded the First Contract, under which he was
entitled to receive an appearance fee of EUR 1,000 net for each official match during the
2022/2023 season in which he was included in the matchday squad. According to the
Player, he participated in a total of 20 matches as a member of the starting eleven, two as
a substitute player and three as an unused substitute. In this regard, the Player argued that
he was entitled to EUR 23,000 by way of appearance fees, but the Club only paid him EUR
20,000 on 18 August 2023, leaving an undisputed balance of EUR 3,000 net.
14. Furthermore, the Player mentioned that, based on the Second Contract, he was entitled to
EUR 70,000 net, to be paid in ten instalments of EUR 7,000 between August 2023 and May
2024. Nevertheless, the Player alleged that the Club failed to duly and punctually discharge
its salary obligations. According to the Player, on 8 December 2023 the Club paid him EUR
10,000, of which EUR 3,000 was allocated towards the settlement of the outstanding
balance of the appearance fee, while the remaining sum of EUR 7,000 was allocated to a
pg. 4
REF. FPSD-20408
monthly salary. Moreover, the Player alleged that on 19 January 2024, the Club paid him
EUR 3,500 corresponding to 50% of a salary, leaving the remaining 50% outstanding.
15. In addition, the Player pointed out that the Club delivered to him two post-dated cheques
in TRY, as partial satisfaction of the salaries due under the Second Contract. The Player
mentioned that this document contained a clause stating that, should the EUR/TRY
exchange rate on the maturity date of either cheque exceed the contractual reference rate
of 31 TRY per EUR, the positive differential would be computed and separately remitted by
the Respondent to the Claimant. According to the Player, TRY 383,000 on 5 February 2024
was equivalent to EUR 11,683.95 and TRY 500,000 on 8 May 2024 was equivalent to EUR
14,459.22.
16. In light of the above, the Player argued that he received EUR 36,643.17, which
corresponded to the complete payment of his monthly salaries for August, September,
October, November and December 2023, together with a partial payment of EUR 1,643.17
for January 2024. Therefore, the Player alleged the Club owes him EUR 33,356.83, of which
EUR 5,356.83 corresponded to the balance for January 2024 and EUR 28,000 for each of the
salaries for February, March, April and May 2024. The Player asserted that he put the Club
in default, to no avail.
17. The Claimant’s requests for relief were the following:
“The Player respectfully requests the FIFA Football Tribunal:
1. To find the claim admissible for consideration and resolution in accordance with
Article 12bis of the RSTP.
2. To order the Club to pay the following outstanding overdue payables to the Player:
• NET 33.356,83-EUR (thirty-three thousand three hundred fifty-six Euros eighty-three
cents) with its default interest in total which is;
• NET 5.356,83-EUR (five thousand three hundred fifty-six Euros eighty-three cents) of
the monthly salary payment regarding the January 2024 with its default interest of %5
p.a. from 01 February 2024 until the effective payment date,
• NET 7.000,00-EUR (seven thousand Euros) of the monthly salary payment regarding
the February 2024 with its default interest of %5 p.a. from 01 March 2024 until the
effective payment date,
• NET 7.000,00-EUR (seven thousand Euros) of the monthly salary payment regarding
the March 2024 with its default interest of %5 p.a. from 01 April 2024 until the effective
payment date,
pg. 5
REF. FPSD-20408
• NET 7.000,00-EUR (seven thousand Euros) of the monthly salary payment regarding
the April 2024 with its default interest of %5 p.a. from 01 May 2024 until the effective
payment date,
• NET 7.000,00-EUR (seven thousand Euros) of the monthly salary payment regarding
the May 2024 with its default interest of %5 p.a. from 01 June 2024 until the effective
payment date,
3. To impose sanctions on the Club under Article 12bis of the RSTP for failing to meet its
financial obligations.
4. To order that procedural costs should be paid by the Respondent.”
b. Position of the Respondent
18. In its reply, the Club argued that it had paid the Player all the amounts due and had fulfilled
its obligations. The Club stated that the Player submitted the claim without taking into
account the amounts already paid by the Club and remarked that the amount requested
by the Player was significantly higher than it should be.
19. In this regard, the Club allegedly attached some payment receipts as “Annex 1”, containing
alleged amounts paid to the Player. Nonetheless, no supporting documentation was
uploaded to the FIFA Legal Portal.
20. The Respondent’s requests for relief were the following:
“7. Request for Relief
1. The reasons explained above we kindly request you to decide judgment of dismissal
about the present case.
2. Consider the amounts paid and good faith of the Respondent while evaluating the
Claimant requests according to the reasons explained above and according to the bank
receipts which was provided by the Respondent and setoff the mentioned amount from
the Claimant’s requests.
3. Finally, we would like to request your honorable chamber to make a decision that the
judicial costs and the attorneyship fees that the Respondent is faced with shall be paid
by the Claimant. If not, to award a minimum amount of procedural cost in connection
with the temporary amendment to the Procedural Rules declared with the Circular 1720.”
pg. 6
REF. FPSD-20408
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
21. 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 19 August 2025 and submitted
for decision on 10 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.
22. 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 Dispute Resolution Chamber is competent to deal with the matter at stake,
which concerns an employment-related dispute with an international dimension between
a Bulgarian player and a Turkish club.
23. 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
24. 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
25. 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. 7
REF. FPSD-20408
i. Main legal discussion and considerations
26. The Single Judge then moved to the substance of the matter, noting that it concerned a
claim brought by a player against a club for outstanding remuneration.
27. The Single Judge recalled that, according to the Player, the Club failed to pay him EUR
33,356.83, of which EUR 5,356.83 corresponded to the balance for January 2024 and EUR
28,000 to each of the salaries for February, March, April and May 2024.
28. The Single Judge noted that, conversely, the Club argued that it had paid all the amounts
due to the Player.
29. In this context, the Single Judge acknowledged that her task was to determine whether the
Player is entitled to the amounts claimed.
30. The Single Judge first noted that the Player argued that he was entitled to EUR 70,000 net
and he received EUR 36,643.17, which corresponded to the full payment of his monthly
salaries for August, September, October, November and December 2023, together with a
partial payment of EUR 1,643.17 for January 2024. To substantiate the amounts received,
the Player provided two proofs of payments and a document acknowledging receipt of two
post-dated cheques.
31. Regarding the proofs of payments, the Single Judge observed that the Club paid the Player
EUR 10,000 on 8 December 2023 and EUR 3,500 on 19 January 2024. Although the Player
argued that the first payment corresponded to one salary along with the balance of an
appearance fee due under the First Contract, the Single Judge pointed out that both proof
of payments clearly stated that the payments were for the “December-January salary
payment” and “January salary payment”. In this respect, considering that the Club expressly
allocated these payments, the Single Judge concluded that with the EUR 13,500 payment
the Club covered the full salary for December 2023 and nearly the full salary for January
2024, leaving EUR 500 unpaid.
32. The Single Judge emphasized that the Player did not allocate this payment to the alleged
remaining balance of this appearance fee until 1 August 2025, when he sent his notice of
default, i.e., more than a year and a half after the payment was received. Therefore, the
Single Judge stressed that it could not be determined that either the Player or the Club
allocated that payment to the appearance fee.
33. Having established the above, the Single Judge moved on to analyse the cheque payments.
In this regard, she noted that the Player received TRY 383,000 on 5 February 2024 and TRY
500,000 on 8 May 2024. Although the parties stated that they had calculated the exchange
rate at TRY 31 per EUR 1, they also agreed that, in the event of any discrepancy, the Club
would bear the positive differential. In this sense, the Single Judge highlighted that TRY
pg. 8
REF. FPSD-20408
383,000 on 5 February 2024 was equivalent to EUR 11,612.50 and TRY 500,000 on 8 May
2024 was equivalent to EUR 14,387.
34. In this regard, the Single Judge concluded that, with these cheques, the Player received EUR
25,999.50. Since these payments were not allocated to a specific month but only to the
Second Contract, the Single Judge interpreted that with these payments the Club covered
the oldest debts under that contract: the full salaries for August, September and October
2023, at EUR 7,000 each, and part of November 2023, amounting to EUR 4,999.50
35. Having stated the above, the Single Judge pointed out that the Club, which bore the burden
of proving that it paid all the amounts due under the Second Contract, did not provide any
further evidence. Hence, the Single Judge concluded that the Club failed to pay the Player
EUR 2,000.50 for November 2023, EUR 500 for January 2024 and the full salaries for
February, March, April and May.
36. The Single Judge determined that, in total, the Club failed to pay the Player EUR 30,500.50
and therefore she decided to award the Player these amounts, along with interest as from
the day following each due date.
37. Regarding the balance of November 2023, and since the Player had not requested this
specific amount, the Single Judge clarified that (i) as the overall amount granted does not
exceed the amount requested and it is only a matter of allocation of the owed amounts
under the Second Contract, awarding this amount is not ultra petita and (ii) as the Player
did not request interest on this amount, it would be ultra petita to apply it as from 1
December 2023. Therefore, the Single Judge decided to award interest as from 1 February
2024 on this amount, based on the Player’s request for relief.
38. Moreover, the Single Judge decided to award all the amounts as net payments, as the
Player specifically requested so and the Second Contract established that the Player was
entitled to EUR 70,000 net.
39. Lastly, for the sake of completeness, the Single Judge wished to mention that in this
dispute, the Player is not claiming any amount under the First Contract, such as the
appearance fee.
ii. Art. 12bis of the Regulations
40. The Single Judge then referred to art.12bis par. 2 of the Regulations, which stipulates that
any club found to have delayed a due payment for more than 30 days without a prima facie
contractual basis may be sanctioned, in accordance with art. 12bis par. 4 of the Regulations.
41. To this end, the Single Judge confirmed that the Claimant put the Respondent in default of
payment of the amounts sought, which had fallen due for more than 30 days, and granted
the Respondent with at least 10 days to cure such breach of contract.
pg. 9
REF. FPSD-20408
42. Accordingly, the Single Judge also confirmed that the Respondent had delayed a due
payment without a prima facie contractual basis. It followed that the criteria enshrined in
art. 12bis of the Regulations were met in the case at hand.
43. The Single Judge further established that, by virtue of art. 12bis par. 4 of the Regulations
the Single Judge has competence to impose sanctions on the club. On account of the above
and bearing in mind that this is the fourth offense by the Respondent within the last two
years, the Single Judge decided to impose a warning and a fine of USD 7,500 on the
Respondent in accordance with art. 12bis par. 4 lit. a) and c) of the Regulations.
44. The Single Judge also highlighted that a repeated offence will be considered as an
aggravating circumstance and lead to more severe penalty, in accordance with art. 12bis
par. 6 of the Regulations.
iii. Compliance with monetary decisions
45. 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. In this regard, she highlighted that, against clubs, the
consequence of the failure to pay the relevant amounts in due time shall consist, in
principle, of a ban from registering any new players, either nationally or internationally, up
until the due amounts are paid.
46. Notwithstanding the above, the Single Judge 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.
47. In this respect, the Single Judge recalled that by means of a decision of the Football Tribunal
passed on date 3 April 2025 and notified on 9 April 2025, a transfer ban has been imposed
on the Respondent pursuant to art. 17 par. 4 of the Regulations, namely in the case FPSD17990.
48. Accordingly, the Single Judge established that in casu 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.
49. In view of the above, the Single Judge decided that if the aforementioned sum plus interest
is not paid within 30 days of notification of this decision, the present matter shall be
pg. 10
REF. FPSD-20408
submitted, upon request of the Claimant, to the FIFA Disciplinary Committee for its
consideration and formal decision.
50. 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.
d. Costs
51. 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.
52. 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.
53. Lastly, the Single Judge concluded her deliberations by rejecting any other requests for
relief made by any of the parties.
pg. 11
REF. FPSD-20408
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Strahil Popov, is partially accepted.
2.
The Respondent, Eminevim Umraniyespor, must pay to the Claimant the following amount:
- EUR 30,500.50 net as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as follows:
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of EUR 2,500.50 net as from 1 February 2024 until the
date of effective payment;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of EUR 7,000 net as from 1 March 2024 until the date
of effective payment;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of EUR 7,000 net as from 1 April 2024 until the date
of effective payment;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of EUR 7,000 net as from 1 May 2024 until the date of
effective payment;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of EUR 7,000 net as from 1 June 2024 until the date of
effective payment.
3.
Any further claims of the Claimant are rejected.
4.
A warning and a fine in the amount of USD 7,500 are imposed on the Respondent, which
must be paid to FIFA within 30 days of notification of this decision. Such fine must be
paid to the following bank account with a clear reference to the case FPSD-20408:
UBS Zurich
Account number 230-366677.61N (FIFA Players’ Status)
Clearing number 230
IBAN: CH12 0023 0230 3666 7761 N
SWIFT: UBSWCHZH80A
5.
Full payment (including all applicable interest) shall be made to the bank account indicated
in the enclosed Bank Account Registration Form.
6.
If full payment (including all applicable interest) 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. 12
REF. FPSD-20408
7.
This decision is rendered without costs.
For the Football Tribunal:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
pg. 13
REF. FPSD-20408
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. 14