Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF. FPSD-21486
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 6 November 2025
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the player
Aleksandra Popovic
BY:
Frans DE WEGER, the Netherlands
CLAIMANT:
Aleksandra Popovic, Montenegro
Represented by Giorgio Romano
RESPONDENT:
Tomiris-Turan, Kazakhstan
pg. 2
REF. FPSD-21486
I. Facts of the case
1.
On 15 March 2023, the player from Montenegro, Aleksandra Popovic (hereinafter: the
Claimant or the Player), and the club from Kazakhstan, Tomiris-Turan (hereinafter: the
Respondent or the Club), entered into an employment contract (hereinafter: the Contract)
valid as from its date of signature until 15 October 2023.
2.
In accordance with the Contract, the Respondent undertook to pay the Claimant a monthly
salary of USD 1,200 by no later than the 10th day of the next month.
3.
In addition, article 6 of the Contract read as follows:
“[…] Present employment agreement may be terminated in cases as follows:
• Termination under Parties agreement;
• End of agreement period;
• Termination initiated by one of the Party from 1 July 2023; […]”
4.
On 19 July 2023, the Respondent produced a document confirming that the Contract with
the Claimant expired on 1 July 2023.
5.
On 9 April 2025, the Claimant put the Respondent in default and requested payment within
10 days of USD 1,200, i.e. the monthly salary for June 2023.
6.
On 14 April 2025, the Claimant followed up with the Respondent regarding the default
notice dated 9 April 2025 and stated that, in the absence of any contact or payment within
10 days, a claim would be sent to FIFA.
7.
During May and early June 2025, the Claimant and an alleged representative of the
Respondent engaged in a conversation on WhatsApp, during which the payment of USD
1,200, i.e. the monthly salary for June 2023, was requested on several occasions.
8.
On 12 June 2025, the alleged representative of the Respondent informed the Claimant via
WhatsApp that if she had worked until the end instead of leaving to another club, she would
have been paid.
9.
On 23 July 2025, the alleged representative of the Respondent informed the Claimant via
WhatsApp that she would be paid first to avoid any problems.
10. On 12 August 2025, the alleged representative of the Respondent informed the Claimant
via WhatsApp that she could write a letter, including her bank account details, which he
would forward to the president.
pg. 3
REF. FPSD-21486
11. On 8 September 2025, the Claimant filed a claim against the Respondent before the
Football Tribunal, i.e. case number FPSD-20717, and requested payment of USD 1,200
corresponding to the monthly salary for June 2023.
12. On 15 September 2025, the FIFA general secretariat informed the Claimant that her claim
appeared to be time-barred and therefore that the case number FPSD-20717 would be
closed.
II. Proceedings before FIFA
13. On 23 October 2025, the Claimant filed the present claim before FIFA. A summary of the
claim is detailed below.
14. It is the position of the Claimant that she reached an agreement with the Respondent to
terminate the Contract as of 1 July 2023, but that the Respondent nevertheless failed to
pay her the salary for the month of June 2023.
15. In addition, the Claimant argued that the Respondent acknowledged its debt by asking her
to provide her bank account details to proceed with the payment via WhatsApp, which
interrupted the two-year statute of limitation set forth in the Regulations on the Status and
Transfer of Players (hereinafter: the Regulations).
16. Considering the foregoing, the Claimant requested payment from the Respondent of the
monthly salary for June 2023 in the amount of USD 1,200, plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1
July 2023 until the date of effective payment.
17. On 2 November 2025, the FIFA general secretariat informed the Claimant that the matter
in question raised a preliminary procedural issue regarding the admissibility of the claim
and would therefore be submitted for an expedited decision in accordance with art. 19 of
the Procedural Rules Governing the Football Tribunal (hereinafter: the Procedural Rules).
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
18. First of all, the Chairperson of Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: the Chairperson)
analysed whether he was competent to deal with the case: an employment-related dispute
with an international dimension between a player from Montenegro and a club from
Kazakhstan, which, in principle, falls within the jurisdiction of the Dispute Resolution
Chamber pursuant to arts. 23 par. 1 and 22 par. 1 lit. b) of the Regulations.
19. In this respect, he took note that the present matter was presented to FIFA on 23 October
2025 and submitted for a preliminary decision on 2 November 2025. Taking into account
the wording of arts. 31 and 34 of the January 2025 edition of the Procedural Rules, the
aforementioned edition of the Procedural Rules is applicable to the matter at hand.
pg. 4
REF. FPSD-21486
20. Furthermore, the Chairperson confirmed that, in accordance with art. 19 par. 1 and 2 of
the Procedural Rules, he is competent to decide, in an expedited manner, whether the case
at stake is affected by any preliminary procedural matter. Likewise, the Chairperson
highlighted that, if the claim is not affected by any preliminary procedural matters, the FIFA
general secretariat would be ordered to continue the procedure (cf. art. 19 par. 3 of the
Procedural Rules).
21. At this point, the Chairperson turned his attention to the present claim lodged by the Player
on 23 October 2025, and observed that she claimed to be entitled to the monthly salary for
June 2023 in the amount of USD 1,200, plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 July 2023 until the
date of effective payment. Accordingly, the Chairperson confirmed that the claim at hand
raises a preliminary procedural matter that shall be analysed ex officio, namely whether it
is affected by the statute of limitations and should therefore be deemed inadmissible.
22. In this context, the Chairperson recalled the content of art. 23 par. 3 of the Regulations,
according to which “The Football Tribunal shall not hear any case subject to these regulations
if more than two years have elapsed since the event giving rise to the dispute. Application of this
time limit shall be examined ex officio in each individual case”.
23. Considering the foregoing, the Chairperson recalled that the Claimant lodged the present
claim against the Respondent on 23 October 2025. Therefore, the Chairperson stated, in
line with art. 23 par. 3 of the Regulations, that any amounts fallen due before 23 October
2023 would be affected by the statute of limitations, including the Player’s salary for June
2023.
24. Notwithstanding the above, the Chairperson took note that the Claimant stated that the
Respondent acknowledged its debt through WhatsApp messages, which allegedly
interrupted the two-year statute of limitations set forth in the Regulations.
25. At this point, the Chairperson referred to art. 13 par. 5 of the Procedural Rules, according
to which a party that asserts a fact has the burden of proving it.
26. In the present matter, after a thorough analysis of the documentation on file and the
position of the Claimant, the Chairperson found no evidence of a formal agreement
between the parties in 2025. He further considered that the WhatsApp messages provided
were insufficient to novate the parties’ obligations. Consequently, the event giving rise to
the dispute remained the Claimant’s outstanding monthly salary for June 2023, which was
due to be paid no later than 1 July 2023, i.e. the date of termination of the Contract.
27. In view of the above, the Chairperson deemed that more than two years had elapsed since
the event giving rise to the dispute and that he was therefore precluded from considering
the matter.
pg. 5
REF. FPSD-21486
28. Consequently, the Chairperson decided that the present claim time-barred in line with art.
23 par. 3 of the Regulations.
29. For the sake of completeness, the Chairperson also pointed out that the first claim of the
Claimant against the Respondent, i.e. case number FPSD-20717, was also affected by the
statute of limitations. Therefore, it has bearing on the admissibility of the present claim.
30. Finally, the Chairperson 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 Chairperson decided that no procedural costs were
to be imposed on the parties.
pg. 6
REF. FPSD-21486
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Aleksandra Popovic, is inadmissible.
2.
This decision is rendered without costs.
For the Football Tribunal:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
pg. 7
REF. FPSD-21486
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. 8