DRC - Preliminary Decisions
Texto da decisão
REF. FPSD-21773
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 28 November 2025
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the player
Henry David Ridgway Mott
BY:
Frans DE WEGER, The Netherlands, Chairperson
CLAIMANT:
Henry David Ridgway Mott, Great Britain
Represented by Beng'yela Ngwa
RESPONDENT:
Manchester 62 FC, Gibraltar
pg. 2
REF. FPSD-21773
I. Facts of the case
1.
The parties to this dispute are:
• The player Henry David Ridgway Mott (hereinafter: the Player or the Claimant), who was
born in Reading (United Kingdom); and
• The club Manchester 62 FC (hereinafter: the Club or the Respondent), which is based in
Gibraltar (British Overseas Territory) and affiliated to the Gibraltar Football Association
(GFA).
2.
On 14 February 2024, the Player was transferred in the Transfer Matching System (TMS)
from the English club, AFC Totton, to the Gibraltarian club, Manchester 1962 FC. In this
transfer instruction, the Player was listed as a British citizen, as per the passport provided
in support of the transfer, which indicated that the Player was born in Reading in the United
Kingdom, on 30 April 2005.
3.
On 17 June 2024, the parties entered into an employment contract (hereinafter: the
Employment Contract) valid from the date of signature until 31 May 2027, which entitled the
Player to receive a monthly salary of GBP 1,650 for the 2025-2026 season.
4.
On 11 September 2025, the Player, through his agent, sent an email to the GFA stating that
he had not received his salary for three (3) months and requesting information to find a
resolution to that situation without further escalation.
5.
On 17 September 2025, the Player, through his agent, sent a follow-up email to the GFA
recalling the content of his previous email, and requesting its assistance.
6.
On the same day, Mr. Karl Tilbury, Head of Legal of the GFA, replied that the GFA cannot
be involved in disputes between players or coaches and clubs and directed the Player to
the National Disputes Resolution Chamber of the GFA or to the FIFA Dispute Resolution
Chamber.
7.
On 15 October 2025, the Player, through his agent, sent an email to Mr. Tilbury to confirm
that a fourth salary instalment became outstanding.
8.
On 24 October 2025, the Player, through his agent, sent an email to Mr. Tilbury stating that
the Player was informed by his landlord that he would be at risk of eviction, and of
homelessness since he was not able to pay his rent due to the outstanding salaries.
pg. 3
REF. FPSD-21773
9.
On the same day, the Mr. Tilbury informed that the GFA was monitoring the process and
confirmed that the GFA would again contact the Club to raise the situation.
10. On 30 October 2025, the Player sent an email to the GFA requesting that he be allowed to
return to the United Kingdom for his safety and wellbeing, as he faced eviction from his
accommodation after not being paid four months of salary.
II. Proceedings before FIFA
11. On 6 November 2025, the Player filed the claim at hand before FIFA.
12. According to the Player he signed a three-year contract with the Club, and that it is in its
second year of validity.
13. The Player stated that the Club failed to pay him his salaries for 5 consecutive months
amounting to GBP 8,100 and that he had been excluded from matchday squads. In
addition, he added that the non-payment of his salaries saw him be evicted from his
accommodation and Gibraltar, and that as a consequence he was forced to return to the
United Kingdom as a “protective and safeguarding measure”, but that he did not terminate
his contract.
14. The Claimant’s requests for relief were the following, quoted verbatim:
“
1. The Claimant respectfully requests that the FIFA Football Tribunal (Agent Chamber):
2. Declare that Manchester 62 FC is in breach of contract under Article 14bis RSTP.
3. Order immediate payment of all outstanding salaries and entitlements totalling
€12,196.34 (remainder of contract is expected to be paid)
4. Order compensation for moral and material damages arising from the welfare and
safeguarding violations.
5. Declare that the Player’s temporary return to the UK does not constitute a termination, but
a justified safeguarding measure.
6. Refer the matter to the FIFA Disciplinary Committee for potential sanctions under Article
12bis RSTP and the FIFA Disciplinary Code.
7. Award legal costs and agent’s administrative fees associated with this claim.
pg. 4
REF. FPSD-21773
8. Grant any other relief deemed appropriate to ensure fairness, player protection, and
compliance with FIFA regulations.”
15. On 21 November 2025, the FIFA General Secretariat informed the Claimant that the matter
in question raised a preliminary procedural issue regarding the jurisdiction of the Football
Tribunal 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).
pg. 5
REF. FPSD-21773
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
16. First of all, the Chairperson of the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: the
Chairperson) analysed whether he was competent to deal with the case at hand.
17. In doing so, he noted that this matter had been presented to FIFA on 6 November 2025
and submitted for a preliminary decision on 21 November 2025. Taking into account the
wording of art. 34 of the January 2025 edition of the Procedural Rules, the Chairperson
determined that this edition of the Procedural Rules was applicable to this matter.
18. Furthermore, in accordance with art. 19 par. 1 and 2 of the Procedural Rules, the
Chairperson confirmed his competence to decide, in an expedited manner, whether this
case is affected by any preliminary procedural matter (i.e., whether the Football Tribunal
obviously lacks jurisdiction or if the claim is time-barred). 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).
19. The Chairperson then 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 employment-related disputes
between players and clubs with an international dimension.
20. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Chairperson noted that an issue regarding the Football
Tribunal’s jurisdiction over the present claim exists and must be addressed accordingly.
21. At this point, the Chairperson recalled that the wording of art. 22 par. 1 lit. b) of the
Regulations clearly implies that the first condition that needs to be compulsorily fulfilled in
order for FIFA to be competent to hear an employment related dispute between a club and
a player is that the said dispute has an international dimension. This means, in other words,
that in case the player has the same nationality from the country where the club that holds
his registration is based, the relevant dispute must be considered a purely internal
(national) matter to be decided by the competent authorities in the respective country.
22. If the parties are of the same nationality (or even if they have a second nationality), an
international dimension is only established if the player can prove that they were
considered a foreigner in the country concerned.1
See, for example, CAS 2014/A/3682 Lamontville Golden Arrows Football FC v. Kurt Kowarz & Fédération
Internationale de Football Association (FIFA).
1
pg. 6
REF. FPSD-21773
23. In other words, if the player is a national of the country in which the club is based, the
dispute is considered to be of a purely national nature and therefore outside the Football
Tribunal’s jurisdiction. According to the Chairperson, this is because the mens legis of the
rule is to protect the parties’ access to justice and fair proceedings, while also respecting
the autonomy of the member associations and the national dispute resolution system.
24. Therefore, where the player is registered under the same nationality as the club, or both
parties indeed share the same nationality / seat, the minimum requirement of the
international dimension is not met.
25. According to the Chairperson, this is precisely the case at hand, since the Player is a British
citizen and the Club is based in Gibraltar (i.e., a British Overseas Territory). Therefore, the
Chairperson confirmed that both parties shared the same (state) nationality.
26. The Chairperson was further reassured in his conclusion by the Football Tribunal’s previous
confirmation of the absence of an international dimension in cases involving clubs from
Gibraltar (also a British Overseas Territory) and British citizens (see, for example,
FPSD3466, FPSD-3467, FPSD-3468, FPSD-3529, FPSD-10562). The same rationale was also
applied in cases involving clubs based in China PR and players with Chinese nationality and
passports issued by Hong Kong (see Commentary on the Regulations, Edition 2023 – p. 4446).
27. Further, the Chairperson acknowledged that CAS had also confirmed this approach in an
award issued on 18 March 2024, when it upheld a previous decision passed by the Football
Tribunal2. In that case, the Sole Arbitrator was also dealing with the dispute between a
British player and a club based in Gibraltar, and ruled that:
• the wording of art. 22, par. 1 lit. b) of the Regulations is clear and reinforced by the
consistent jurisprudence of the Football Tribunal and CAS in similar cases;
• the existence of the international dimension was conditional on the player being a
foreigner in the club’s country;
• the fact that the parties shared the same British nationality and the player was
registered as a British national was considered to be a decisive argument; and
• in conclusion, there was no international element for players with nationalities of
independent countries which have more than one member association of FIFA
incorporated within their territory.
2
CAS 2023/A/9957 Carlos Patrick Simeon v. Lynx Football Club Limited.
pg. 7
REF. FPSD-21773
28. The Chairperson emphasized that the Football Tribunal had adhered to the above
reasoning for several years and continues to do so.
29. In conclusion, the Chairperson decided that the Football Tribunal does not have jurisdiction
to hear the claim of the Player.
b. Costs
30. Having established the above, 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”. While confirming that the Claimant is not a
coach under the Regulations, the Chairperson recalled that the mens legis of the cited
provision is directed at natural person, who, unlike legal persons, are not required to bear
any costs relating to proceedings before the Football Tribunal.
31. Lastly, the Chairperson decided that no procedural costs were to be imposed on the
Claimant, as it would be unfair in this specific case for a party who is not subject to the
Football Tribunal’s jurisdiction to have to pay any costs.
pg. 8
REF. FPSD-21773
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The Football Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to hear the claim of the Claimant, Henry
David Ridgway Mott.
2. This decision is rendered without costs.
For the Football Tribunal:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
pg. 9
REF. FPSD-21773
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