Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF. FPSD-21390
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 3 February 2026
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the player Cosqun
Diniyev
BY:
Khadija TIMERA (Senegal)
CLAIMANT:
Cosqun Diniyev, Azerbaijan
Represented by Nihat Güman
RESPONDENT:
Royal Hastanesi Bandirmaspor, Türkiye
Represented by Ercan Sevdimbaş
pg. 2
REF. FPSD-21390
I. Facts of the case
1.
On 10 February 2025, the Azerbaijani player Cosqun Diniyev (hereinafter: the Player or the
Claimant) and the Turkish club Royal Hastanesi Bandirmaspor (hereinafter: the Club or the
Respondent) entered into a mutual termination agreement whereby they put an end to their
employment relationship. The termination agreement provided, inter alia, as follows:
-
2.
“1.2 The Parties acknowledge that the Player has a total receivable of 3,150 Euros
corresponding to seven days salary for February, arising from the Professional Football
Player Contract its annexes, and the Protocol dated 29.07.2024 to 30.06.2025. This Mutual
termination Protocol is issued due to the agreement of the Player and the Club upon mutual
termination in exchange for the Player’s receivables and as compensation for early
termination. The Club shall pay the Player a net amount of 25,000 Euros on August 1,2025,
in accordance with this Mutual Termination / Termination Protocol. In other words. the
Player acknowledges, declares, and undertakes that upon the Club’s payment of 25,000
Euros net on August 1, 2025, he will no longer have any existing or future rights or claims
against the Club. “
On 28 September 2025, the Player sent a letter to the Club asking the payment of the
relevant amount due under the termination agreement and contextually granting 10 days
to remedy the alleged breach.
II. Proceedings before FIFA
3.
On 16 October 2025, the Player filed the claim at hand before FIFA. A summary of the
parties’ respective positions is detailed below.
a. Position of the Player
4.
In his claim, the Player alleged the Club’s failure to comply with its financial obligations
under the termination agreement
5.
The Claimant’s requests for relief, accordingly, amounted to EUR 25,000 net as overdue
payables plus a 5% interest on the said amounts running as from 1 August 2025 until the
effective date of payment.
b. Position of the Club
6.
In its defence brief, the Club argued having complied with its obligations by paying the
entire amount of EUR 25,000 as per the terms stipulated in the termination agreement.
7.
In this respect, the Club referred to the payment receipts purportedly attached to the reply.
pg. 3
REF. FPSD-21390
8.
The Club requested therefore to dismiss the claim in its entirety.
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
9.
First of all, the Single Judge of 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 16
October 2025 and submitted for decision on 3 February 2026. Taking into account the
wording of arts. 32 and 35 of the January 2026 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.
10. 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 an Azerbaijani
player and a Turkish club.
11. 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
12. 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
13. 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
pg. 4
REF. FPSD-21390
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
14. The Single Judge then moved to the substance of the matter and took note of the fact that
the parties strongly dispute the payment of the amounts stipulated under the termination
agreement signed on 10 February 2025.
15. 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 Club and, if so, whether the latter had a valid justification for not having
complied with its financial obligations.
16. Having said that, the Single Judge observed that based on the termination agreement, the
Club should have paid a total of EUR 25,000 to the Player by no later than 1 August 2025.
17. In this respect, the Single Judge took note of the Club’s objections according to which the
said amount would have already been paid.
18. Nonetheless, the Single Judge observed that the Club did not provide any evidence of the
alleged payments.
19. The Single Judge emphasized that in the case at hand the Club bore the burden of proving
that it indeed complied with the financial terms of the contract concluded between the
parties. Nonetheless, absent such evidence and any reasonable justification by the Club for
not having complied with the terms of the contract, the Single Judge decided that its
position could not be upheld.
20. Accordingly, the Single Judge concluded that the amounts of EUR 25,000 remain
outstanding to date.
21. As a consequence, and in accordance with the general legal principle of pacta sunt servanda,
the Single Judge decided that the Club is liable to pay to the Player the amounts which
remained outstanding under the termination agreement, i.e., EUR 25,000.
22. In addition, taking into consideration the Player’s request as well as the constant practice
of the Football Tribunal in this regard, the Single Judge decided to award the Player interest
at the rate of 5% p.a. on the outstanding amounts as from 1 August 2025 until the date of
effective payment.
ii. Art. 12bis of the Regulations
pg. 5
REF. FPSD-21390
23. 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.
24. 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.
25. 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.
26. 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 the Club is a repeat offender, the Single Judge decided to impose
a fine on the Respondent in the amount of USD 5,000, in accordance with art. 12bis par. 4
lit. c) of the Regulations.
27. 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
28. 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.
29. 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.
30. 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.
pg. 6
REF. FPSD-21390
31. 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.
32. 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
33. 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.
34. 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.
35. Lastly, the Single Judge concluded her deliberations by rejecting any other requests for
relief made by any of the parties.
pg. 7
REF. FPSD-21390
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Cosqun Diniyev, is accepted.
2.
The Respondent, ROYAL HASTANESİ BANDIRMASPOR, must pay to the Claimant the
following amount(s):
3. EUR 25,000 net as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 2 August
2025 until the date of effective payment.
4.
A fine in the amount of USD 5,000 is 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-21390:
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.
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.
7.
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.
pg. 8
REF. FPSD-21390
8.
This decision is rendered without costs.
For the Football Tribunal:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
pg. 9
REF. FPSD-21390
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. 10