Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF. FPSD-20668
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 24 October 2025
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the player Mladen
Veselinovic
BY:
Angela COLLINS, Australia
CLAIMANT:
Mladen Veselinovic, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Represented by Drazen Nikolic
RESPONDENT:
Kyzylzhar, Kazakhstan
pg. 2
REF. FPSD-20668
I. Facts of the case
1.
On 15 January 2023, the Bosnian player Mladen Veselinovic (hereinafter: the Player or the
Claimant) and the Kazakh club Kyzylzhar (hereinafter: the Club or the Respondent) entered
an employment contract (hereinafter: the Contract) valid from the date of signature until 15
November 2023.
2.
Pursuant to Clause 3 of the Contract, the Club undertook to pay the Player a monthly net
remuneration of KZT 2,820,000, comprising KZT 2,115,000 as salary and KZT 705,000 as a
“fixed personal allowance”, payable no later than the 25th day following the month of
settlement.
3.
The Appendix 1 of the Contract (hereinafter: the Appendix) further established the “Terms
and periods of Personal Allowance payment”. In particular, Clause 2.8 of the Appendix
provided:
“2.8. The personal allowance shall be reduced or not paid to the [Player] in cases as
follows:
a) Resolutions adopted by KFF or the Federation Internationale de Football Association
(FIFA), the Union of European Football Associations (UEFA) on disqualification of the
[Player] from participation in football matches/competitions.
b) transfer of the [Player] to the lower league or transfer of the [Player] to the second
team of the [Club]’s team in virtue of the [Club]’s regulation.
c) breach by the [Club] of requirements stipulated by Internal Regulation, this
Employment Contract and Appendices hereto as well as any other regulatory
documents of the Employer.
d) application of disciplinary sanctions.
e) if the [Club]’s team lost two or more matches of the 2023 football championship in
the reporting gaming month.”
4.
On 23 July 2025, the Player sent the Club a notice of default, demanding payment of EUR
12,000 within 8 days.
II. Proceedings before FIFA
5.
On 3 September 2025, the Player filed the claim at hand before FIFA. A summary of the
parties’ respective positions is detailed below.
pg. 3
REF. FPSD-20668
a. Claim of the Player
6.
According to the Player, he was entitled to a monthly net salary of EUR 4,500, covering the
period from 15 January to 15 November 2023. The Player asserted that the Club had only
partially fulfilled its payment obligations, leaving unpaid wages totaling EUR 12,000.
7.
Specifically, the Club failed to pay the full amounts for August (EUR 750), September (EUR
4,500), October (EUR 4,500), and November (EUR 2,250) of 2023. The Player also pointed
out that he had issued a formal notice on 23 July 2025, but the Club did not respond or
settle the outstanding debt.
8.
The Player requested the following relief:
“Respondent is ordered to pay to Claimant EUR 12.000,00 on the name of monthly wages
for August, September, October and November 2023 plus interest at the rate of 5% p.a.
as follows:
-
For month of August 2023 interest on the amount of 750 EUR as of 26th September
2023 until full payment;
-
For month of September 2023 interest on the amount of 4.500 EUR as of 26th October
2023 until full payment;
-
For month of October 2023 interest on the amount of 4.500 EUR as of 26th November
2023 until full payment;
-
For month of November 2023 interest on the amount of 2.250 EUR as of 26th
December 2023 until full payment.
Claimant as well is asking FIFA’s decision-making bodies to impose sanctions on the club
should the monetary decision not be complied with and for such possible sanctions to
be part of the decision as to the substance of the dispute in accordance with Article 24
of the FIFA Regulations.”
b. Reply of the Club
9.
On 22 September 2025, the Club submitted its reply to the Player’s claim.
10. The Club acknowledged the existence of Contract and its Appendix. It clarified that the
Player’s monthly salary consisted of a basic salary and a personal bonus, the latter being
conditional and non-guaranteed. The Club pointed out that, according to Clause 2.8(g) of
the appendix, the personal bonus could be reduced or withheld if the team lost two or
more matches, which occurred in October 2023. The Club emphasized that the bonus was
discretionary, performance-based, and subject to unilateral modification by the Club.
pg. 4
REF. FPSD-20668
11. The Club argued that it had fulfilled all financial obligations under the Contract, including
payments for August through November 2023, and provided bank payment orders and a
salary schedule as evidence. It also noted that the Player was on paid vacation from 1 to 14
November 2023, and that compensation for this period had been duly paid.
12. The Club challenged the conversion of the claimed amount into Euros (EUR), stating that
the Contract specified payment in Kazakhstani tenge (KZT), and the Player failed to justify
the conversion rate or provide a basis for the euro-denominated claim. It cited
jurisprudence from the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) to support its position that
claims in foreign currency must be precise and justified.
13. Furthermore, the Club asserted that the Player had not raised any concerns or claims
regarding unpaid wages between November 2023 and July 2025, and that the demand for
payment sent in July 2025 lacked sufficient documentation. The Club claimed that its
requests for supporting documents were ignored by the Player’s legal representatives.
14. The Club submitted the following relief, quoted verbatim:
“VII. Based on the foregoing, the Club respectfully requests the FIFA Dispute Resolution
Chamber to:
1. Dismiss the Claimant M. Veselinović's claim for EUR 12 000 plus interest from FC KyzylZhar as unsubstantiated and unfounded.
2. Accept the evidence provided by Defendant FC Kyzyl-Zhar of the absence of debt.
3. Recognize that there has been no breach of the terms of the employment contract by
Defendant FC Kyzyl-Zhar.
4. Deny the Claimant M. Veselinović's request for sanctions under Article 24 of the FIFA
Regulations for lack of grounds.”
c. Replica of the Claimant
15. On 6 October 2025, the Player submitted his replica.
16. In this submission, the Player acknowledged receipt of the payment receipts provided by
the Club and confirmed their authenticity. However, he contested the accuracy of the Club’s
calculations, arguing that the first and last salary payments were below the contractual
amounts and lacked any legal justification. He emphasized that annual leave could not be
used as a basis for salary reduction, insofar as the Contract guaranteed full salary during
leave.
pg. 5
REF. FPSD-20668
17. The Player also rejected the Club’s argument that the salary was composed of a fixed and
bonus component. He asserted that even if such a structure were contractually valid, it
would still be inconsistent with FIFA regulations. Regarding the issue of currency
conversion, the Player provided official exchange rates for KZT to EUR for January and
November 2023, thereby justifying the euro-denominated claim.
18. Based on the payment records and exchange rates, the Player recalculated the outstanding
debt. He stated that the Club paid EUR 3,392.46 for January and EUR 1,150.41 for
November, while the contractual amounts were EUR 5,654.10 and EUR 5,623.00,
respectively. This left a remaining debt of EUR 2,261.64 for January and EUR 4,472.59 for
November, totalling EUR 6,734.23.
19. Accordingly, the Player amended his original claim and requested the DRC to issue an
award ordering the Club to pay EUR 6,734.23, along with 5% annual interest calculated
from:
• 26 February 2023 for the January 2023 salary; and
• 26 December 2023 for the November 2023 salary.
d. Duplica of the Respondent
20. On 13 October 2025, the Club submitted its duplica.
21. In this submission, the Club reaffirmed its position that it had fulfilled all contractual
obligations toward the Player, including salary payments for the months in question. The
Club reiterated that the salary structure under the Contract included a fixed base salary
and a discretionary personal bonus, which was subject to performance conditions and
internal decisions. It emphasized that the bonus was not guaranteed, and its payment
could be reduced or withheld, particularly in light of the team’s performance during the
relevant period.
22. The Club challenged the amended claim submitted by the Player, which reduced the
alleged debt to EUR 6,734.23, arguing that even this revised amount was unfounded. It
maintained that the Player had already received all payments due, including for January
and November 2023, and that any discrepancies were due to the non-payment of bonuses,
which were not contractually fixed.
23. Additionally, the Club disputed the Player’s interpretation of the Contract provisions
regarding annual leave, asserting that the salary paid during leave was in accordance with
Kazakh labour law and the Contract. It also reiterated that the conversion of KZT to EUR
was not properly substantiated by the Player, and that the claim lacked a clear and justified
basis for currency conversion.
pg. 6
REF. FPSD-20668
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
24. 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 3 September 2025 and
submitted for decision on 24 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.
25. 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 Bosnian player and a Kazakh club.
26. At this point, the Single Judge noted that this dispute concerned a claim lodged by the
Player against the Club for alleged outstanding remuneration under the terms of Contract.
Further, following the exchange of submissions between the parties, the Single Judge
acknowledged that the Player ultimately limited his claim to the balance of salary for
January 2023 and November 2023, having confirmed receipt of partial payments made by
the Club under the Contract.
27. Notwithstanding the above, the Single Judge recalled that in accordance with art. 23 par. 3
of the Regulations, the prescription period for claims is two years from the date on which
the alleged entitlement arose. Nonetheless, this assessment is made ex officio by the
Football Tribunal.
28. The Single Judge then emphasized that, given that the salary for January 2023 would have
been due no later than 25 February 2023, and the claim was formally lodged on 3
September 2025, the claim for the January 2023 salary was time-barred.
29. Consequently, the Single Judge decided that the Player’s claim for the salary of January 2023
was inadmissible.
30. Lastly, 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.
pg. 7
REF. FPSD-20668
b. Burden of proof
31. 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
32. 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.
i. Main legal discussion and considerations
33. The Single Judge then moved to the substance of the matter, recalling that it concerned a
claim brought by a player against a club for outstanding remuneration under the Contract.
34. Notwithstanding the inadmissibility of the claim for the salary of January 2023, the Single
Judge considered that the Player remained entitled to pursue his claim for the salary of
November 2023.
35. In this respect, the Single Judge noted that the Player alleged the Club paid only EUR
1,150.41 out of the contractually agreed EUR 4,500, leaving a balance of EUR 4,472.59
outstanding. The Club responded that any discrepancies were due to the non-payment of
bonuses (i.e., the personal allowance component), which it claimed were discretionary and
not contractually fixed. Additionally, the Club referred to a deduction due to the Player’s
leave and challenged the currency conversion used by the Player.
36. In this context, the Single Judge first determined that the burden of proof lied with the Club
to demonstrate that it complied with its financial obligations and/or that it had a valid
reason not to do so. However, the Single Judge considered that the evidence submitted by
the Club was only partially translated, unorganized, and it failed to establish a clear and
reliable record of payments.
37. According to the Single Judge, the Club failed to provide any legal basis or documentary
support for the alleged deduction related to the Player’s leave. She pointed out that there
was no internal order or communication was presented to justify the reduction, and the
pg. 8
REF. FPSD-20668
only document on file read that the Player was granted a “paid” leave. Therefore, the Single
Judge that the Club’s argument was flawed.
38. Regarding the currency conversion, while the Contract stipulated payment in KZT, the
Single Judge again considered that the Club did not submit a clear breakdown of payments
in KZT or challenge the Player’s conversion rates with counterevidence. For instance, the
Single Judge found no evidence that the conversion rates used by the Player were
inconsistent or that his calculations were uneven. In light of this omission and the lack of
specification of the proofs of payment, the Single Judge considered that the Club made it
impossible for her to recalculate the amounts in KZT.
39. The Single Judge was also not persuaded by the Club’s argument that the Player’s
performance justified the withholding of payments. Although the Contract provided for
discretion in awarding performance bonuses, the Single Judge considered it essential that
the Club failed to demonstrate that this discretion was applied reasonably, or that the
Player was informed of any such decision. In her opinion, the Club’s reliance on collective
team performance as a basis for withholding a substantial portion of the Player’s
remuneration was insufficient, as well as it lacked procedural / contractual fairness, as it
effectively allowed the Club to unilaterally alter the Player’s agreed remuneration.
40. Accordingly, the Single Judge decided that the Club’s defence could not stand, hence that
the Player was entitled to the outstanding balance of EUR 4,472.59 for November 2023,
plus interest at a rate of 5% p.a. from 26 December 2023 until the date of effective payment.
ii. Compliance with monetary decisions
41. 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.
42. 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.
43. Therefore, bearing in mind the above, the Single Judge decided that the Club must pay the
full amount due (including all applicable interest) to the Player within 45 days of notification
of the decision, failing which, at the request of the Player, 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.
pg. 9
REF. FPSD-20668
44. The Club shall make full payment (including all applicable interest) to the bank account
provided by the Player in the Bank Account Registration Form, which is attached to the
present decision.
45. The Single Judge recalled that the above-mentioned ban will be lifted immediately and prior
to its complete serving upon payment of the due amounts, in accordance with art. 24 par.
8 of the Regulations.
d. Costs
46. 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.
47. 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.
48. Lastly, the Single Judge concluded her deliberations by rejecting any other requests for
relief made by any of the parties.
pg. 10
REF. FPSD-20668
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Mladen Veselinovic, is partially accepted insofar it is admissible.
2.
The Respondent, Kyzylzhar, must pay to the Claimant the following amount(s):
- EUR 4,472.59 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 26 December
2023 until the date of effective payment.
3.
Any further claims of the Claimant are rejected.
4.
Full payment (including all applicable interest) shall be made to the bank account indicated
in the enclosed Bank Account Registration Form.
5.
Pursuant to art. 24 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players, if full payment
(including all applicable interest) is not made within 45 days of notification of this decision,
the following consequences shall apply:
1. The Respondent shall be banned from registering any new players, either nationally or
internationally, up until the due amount is paid. The maximum duration of the ban shall
be of up to three entire and consecutive registration periods.
2. The present matter shall be submitted, upon request, to the FIFA Disciplinary Committee
in the event that full payment (including all applicable interest) is still not made by the
end of the three entire and consecutive registration periods.
6.
The consequences shall only be enforced at the request of the Claimant in accordance
with art. 24 par. 7 and 8 and art. 25 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players.
7.
This decision is rendered without costs.
For the Football Tribunal:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
pg. 11
REF. FPSD-20668
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. 12