Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF. FPSD-20952
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 20 November 2025
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the player
Abdou Samiou Tchatakora
COMPOSITION:
Lívia SILVA KÄGI (Brazil & Switzerland), Deputy Chairwoman
Peter LUKASEK (Slovakia), Member
Dana MOHAMED AL-NOAIMI (Qatar), Member
CLAIMANT:
Abdou Samiou Tchatakora, Togo
Represented by Mawuli Kwaku Avorgah
RESPONDENT:
Saint George SC, Ethiopia
pg. 2
REF. FPSD-20952
I. Facts of the case
1.
On 25 September 2024, the Togolese player Abdou Samiou Tchatakora (hereinafter: the
Claimant or the Player) and the Ethiopian club Saint George SC (hereinafter: the Respondent
or the Club) concluded an employment contract (hereinafter: the Contract) valid as from its
date of signature until 7 July 2026.
2.
In accordance with article 2 of the Contract, the Respondent undertook to pay the Claimant
as follows:
“2.1. The Player’s remuneration shall be Net payment in Ethipian Birr/month
2.2. The Player’s monthly Salary 445693 […]”
3.
In addition, article 3.2 of the Contract read as follows:
“The club agrees to deduct and necessary taxes and make payments to the concerned
government Authority and provided a copy to the player when/if requested.”
4.
On 19 June 2025, the Claimant put the Respondent in default as follows:
“[…] Dear Sir, Madam,
On behalf of the aforementioned professional togolese [sic] football player, MIG (Mak
International Group) is hereby sending you this Notification Letter to claim all unpaid salaries
of the aforementioned player.
The salaries of the months of February, March, April and May 2025 have not been paid to the
player. Not only these salaries have not been paid to the player, but also the salaries of October,
November, December 2024 and January 2025 have not been paid in full to the player.
We hereby kindly ask your club to pay all the unpaid salaries and the unpaid remainings [sic] to
the player by no later than 04 July 2025. […]”
5.
On 9 July 2025, the Claimant unilaterally terminated the Contract.
II. Proceedings before FIFA
6.
On 21 September 2025, the Claimant filed the claim at hand before FIFA. A summary of the
parties’ respective positions is detailed below.
pg. 3
REF. FPSD-20952
a. Position of the Claimant
7.
In his claim, the Claimant argued that he terminated the Contract with just cause due to
outstanding remuneration.
8.
The Claimant’s requests for relief were the following (freely translated from French):
“Outstanding remuneration: ETB 3,565,544
- ETB 445,693, October 2024 salary, plus 5% interest per annum payable from
November 1, 2024
- ETB 445,693, November 2024 salary, plus 5% interest per annum payable
from December 1, 2024
- ETB 445,693, December 2024 salary, plus 5% interest per annum payable from
January 1, 2025
- ETB 445,693, January 2025 salary, plus 5% interest per annum payable from
February 1, 2025
- ETB 445,693, February 2025 salary, plus 5% interest per annum payable from
March 1, 2025
- ETB 445,693, March 2025 salary, plus 5% interest per annum payable from
April 1, 2025
- ETB 445,693, April 2025 salary, plus 5% interest per annum payable from May
1, 2025
- ETB 445,693, May 2025 salary, plus 5% interest per annum payable from June
1, 2025
Residual value of the contract: ETB 445,693 x 14 months = ETB 6,239,702, plus 5% interest per
annum in cash from July 9, 2025
Residual term of the contract: from June 2025 to July 2026, i.e., 14 months.
Additional compensation: ETB 445,693 x 3 months = ETB 5,794,009, plus 5% interest per annum
payable from July 9, 2025”
b. Position of the Respondent
9.
In its reply, the Respondent argued that, in accordance with article 3.2 of the Contract and
the information on the FIFA Transfer Matching System (TMS), the monthly salary of the
Player was USD 2,500 net, which corresponds to ETB 290,455 net. In addition, the
Respondent argued that it had fulfilled its financial obligations towards the Claimant under
the Contract and that the latter abandoned the team without notice.
10. Considering the foregoing, the Respondent requested that the Claimant’s claim be
dismissed in its entirety.
pg. 4
REF. FPSD-20952
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
11. First of all, the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: the Chamber or the 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 21 September 2025 and submitted for
decision on 20 November 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 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), 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 Togolese player and an Ethiopian club.
13. Subsequently, the Chamber analysed which regulations should be applicable as to the
substance of the matter. In this respect, it confirmed that, in accordance with art. 29 of the
Regulations, the July 2025 edition of the Regulations is applicable to the matter at hand as
to the substance.
b. Burden of proof
14. 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 TMS.
c. Merits of the dispute
15. Having established the competence and the applicable regulations, the Chamber entered
into the merits of the dispute. In this respect, the Chamber started by acknowledging all
the above-mentioned facts as well as the arguments and the documentation on file.
However, the Chamber emphasised that in the following considerations it will refer only to
the facts, arguments and documentary evidence, which it considered pertinent for
assessing the matter at hand.
pg. 5
REF. FPSD-20952
i. Main legal discussion and considerations
16. The Chamber then moved to the substance of the matter, and took note of the fact that
the parties dispute the justice of the early termination of the Contract by the Claimant,
based on the alleged non-payment of certain financial obligations by the Respondent as
per the Contract, in accordance with art. 14bis of the Regulations.
17. 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 been fulfilled.
18. 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).
19. The Chamber noted that the Claimant claims not having received his remuneration
corresponding to the monthly salaries from October 2024 to May 2025. Furthermore, the
Chamber observed that the Claimant has provided written evidence of having put the
Respondent in default on 19 June 2025, i.e., at least 15 days before unilaterally terminating
the Contract on 9 July 2025.
20. In continuation, the Chamber noted that, in the case at hand, the Respondent bore the
burden of proving that it indeed complied with the financial terms of the Contract
concluded between the parties. Nonetheless, the Chamber pointed out that the
Respondent failed to provide any evidence to prove the payment of the amounts claimed
as outstanding by the Claimant.
21. Similarly, the Chamber observed that, although the Respondent alleged that the Claimant
had abandoned the Contract, such assertion remained entirely unsubstantiated. In
particular, the Respondent failed to provide any evidence demonstrating that it had
contested the Claimant’s alleged absence or that it had taken any steps to prompt the
Claimant to resume the performance of his contractual obligations.
22. Thus, the Chamber concluded that the Respondent’s defence could not be upheld and, as
a result, that the Claimant had a just cause to unilaterally terminate the Contract, based on
art. 14bis of the Regulations.
ii. Consequences
23. Having stated the above, the Chamber turned its attention to the question of the
consequences of such unjustified breach of contract committed by the Respondent.
pg. 6
REF. FPSD-20952
24. Firstly, 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
amount under the Contract at the moment of its termination, namely the monthly salaries
from October 2024 to June 2025 i.e., ETB 4,011,237 (ETB 445,693 x 9 months).
25. In addition, taking into consideration the Claimant’s request as well as the constant practice
of the Football Tribunal in this regard, the Chamber decided to award the Claimant interest
at the rate of 5% p.a. on the outstanding amounts as follows:
•
5% interest p.a. on the amount of ETB 445,693, i.e., the monthly salary for October
2024, as from 1 November 2024 until the date of effective payment;
•
5% interest p.a. on the amount of ETB 445,693, i.e., the monthly salary for November
2024, as from 1 December 2024 until the date of effective payment;
•
5% interest p.a. on the amount of ETB 445,693, i.e., the monthly salary for December
2024, as from 1 January 2025 until the date of effective payment;
•
5% interest p.a. on the amount of ETB 445,693, i.e., the monthly salary for January
2025, as from 1 February 2025 until the date of effective payment;
•
5% interest p.a. on the amount of ETB 445,693, i.e., the monthly salary for February
2025, as from 1 March 2025 until the date of effective payment;
•
5% interest p.a. on the amount of ETB 445,693, i.e., the monthly salary for March
2025, as from 1 April 2025 until the date of effective payment;
•
5% interest p.a. on the amount of ETB 445,693, i.e., the monthly salary for April 2025,
as from 1 May 2025 until the date of effective payment;
•
5% interest p.a. on the amount of ETB 445,693, i.e., the monthly salary for May 2025,
as from 1 June 2025 until the date of effective payment; and
•
5% interest p.a. on the amount of ETB 445,693, i.e., the monthly salary for June 2025,
as from 1 July 2025 until the date of effective payment.
26. 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.
pg. 7
REF. FPSD-20952
27. In application of the relevant provision, the Chamber held that it first of all had to clarify
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.
28. As a consequence, the Chamber determined that the amount of compensation payable by
the Club to the Player had to be assessed in application of the other parameters set out in
art. 17, par. 1 of the Regulations. In this respect, the Chamber recalled that, as a general
rule, the compensation to be paid to a player by a club shall be equal to the residual value
of the contract that was prematurely terminated, unless this player signed a new contract
following the termination of his previous contract (cf., art. 17 par. 1 lit. i) of the Regulations).
29. 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 ETB 5,448,956.35, i.e., the Player’s monthly salary from July
2025 to 7 July 2026 serves as the basis for the determination of the amount of
compensation for breach of contract, broken down as follows:
•
ETB 5,348,316, as the monthly salaries from July 2025 to June 2026 (ETB 445,693
x 12 months); and
•
ETB 100,640.35 as the pro rata monthly salary for July 2026 (ETB 445,693 / 31 x 7
days).
30. In continuation, the Chamber verified 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 general obligation to mitigate
his damages.
31. The Chamber noted that the Player did not secure new employment following the
termination of the Contract. Consequently, no mitigation or additional compensation
applied (cf., art. 17 par. 1 lit. ii) of the Regulations).
32. 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
ETB 5,448,956.35 to the Claimant (i.e., the residual value of the Contract), which was to be
considered a reasonable and justified amount of compensation for breach of contract in
the present matter.
pg. 8
REF. FPSD-20952
33. 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 from 9 July 2025 until the date of effective
payment.
iii. Sporting sanctions
34. In continuation, the Chamber focused on the further consequences of the breach of
contract in question and, in this respect, it addressed the question of sporting sanctions
against the club in accordance with art. 17 par. 4 of the Regulations. The cited provision
stipulates that, in addition to the obligation to pay compensation, sporting sanctions shall
be imposed on any club found to be in breach of contract during the protected period.
35. In this respect, the Chamber referred to item 7 of the “Definitions” section of the
Regulations, which stipulates inter alia that the protected period shall last “for three entire
seasons or three years, whichever comes first, following the entry into force of a contract, where
such contract is concluded prior to the 28th birthday of the professional, or two entire seasons
or two years, whichever comes first, following the entry into force of a contract, where such
contract is concluded after the 28th birthday of the professional”.
36. In the present matter, the Chamber took note that the Player was born on 5 December
1996 and that the Contract was concluded on 25 September 2024. Furthermore, the
Chamber noted that the Player terminated the Contract with just cause on 9 July 2025, thus
the breach of contract occurred within the protected period.
37. The Chamber then recalled that the Club had already been held liable for breaching other
players’ employment contracts without just cause in several recent occasions, in particular
in cases FPSD-18908, FPSD-19626 and FPSD-19891. In the Chamber’s view, the Club’s status
as a repeat offender warranted the imposition of additional consequences in order to
uphold the principle of contractual stability enshrined in the Regulations.
38. Consequently, the Chamber decided that, by virtue of art. 17 par. 4 of the Regulations, the
Club shall be sanctioned with a ban from registering any new players, either nationally or
internationally, for two entire and consecutive registration periods.
iv. Compliance with monetary decisions
39. 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.
pg. 9
REF. FPSD-20952
40. 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.
41. Notwithstanding the above, the DRC wished to remark that in accordance with art. 24 par.
3 of the Regulations, the aforementioned consequences may be excluded where the
pertinent FIFA deciding body has already imposed on the same party a sporting sanction
on the basis of article 12bis, 17 or 18quater of the Regulations.
42. In this respect, considering that art. 17 par. 4 of the Regulations applies in the matter, the
Chamber established that art. 24 par. 2 of the Regulations shall not apply, insofar as in case
the Respondent fails to comply with the decision at hand, the application of a further ban
from registering any new players on top of the one already being served by the Respondent
would be moot and against the spirit of the Regulations, in particularly the enforcement
mechanism established under art. 24 of the Regulations.
43. In view of the above, the DRC decided that, if the aforementioned sum plus interest is not
paid within 30 days of notification of this decision, the present matter shall be submitted,
upon request of the Claimant, to the FIFA Disciplinary Committee for its consideration and
formal decision.
44. 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
45. 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.
46. 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.
47. Lastly, the DRC concluded its deliberations by rejecting any other requests for relief made
by any of the parties.
pg. 10
REF. FPSD-20952
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Abdou Samiou Tchatakora, is partially accepted.
2.
The Respondent, Saint George SC, must pay to the Claimant the following amounts:
- ETB 4,011,237 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as follows:
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of ETB 445,693 as from 1 November 2024 until the date
of effective payment;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of ETB 445,693 as from 1 December 2024 until the date
of effective payment;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of ETB 445,693 as from 1 January 2025 until the date of
effective payment;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of ETB 445,693 as from 1 February 2025 until the date
of effective payment;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of ETB 445,693 as from 1 March 2025 until the date of
effective payment;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of ETB 445,693 as from 1 April 2025 until the date of
effective payment;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of ETB 445,693 as from 1 May 2025 until the date of
effective payment;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of ETB 445,693 as from 1 June 2025 until the date of
effective payment; and
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of ETB 445,693 as from 1 July 2025 until the date of
effective payment.
- ETB 5,448,956.35 as compensation for breach of contract plus 5% interest p.a. as from
9 July 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.
pg. 11
REF. FPSD-20952
5.
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.
6.
The Respondent shall be banned from registering any new players, either nationally
or internationally, for the next two entire and consecutive registration periods
following the notification of the present decision.
7.
This decision is rendered without costs.
For the Football Tribunal:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
pg. 12
REF. FPSD-20952
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