Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF. FPSD-22298
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 22 February 2026
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the player
Paulo Rafael Pereira Araujo
BY:
Calum BEATTIE (Scotland)
CLAIMANT:
Paulo Rafael Pereira Araujo, Portugal
Represented by José Duarte Reis
RESPONDENT:
Royal Hastanesi Bandirmaspor, Türkiye
Represented by Ercan Sevdimbaş
pg. 2
REF. FPSD-22298
I. Facts of the case
1.
On 28 June 2024, the Portuguese player Paulo Rafael Pereira Araujo (hereinafter: the
Claimant or the Player) and the Turkish club Royal Hastanesi Bandirmaspor (hereinafter: the
Respondent or the Club) concluded an employment contract (hereinafter: the Contract) valid
until 30 June 2025.
2.
According to the Contract, the Respondent undertook to pay the Claimant as follows,
quoted verbatim:
“• 58.000.-EUR net as advance payment will be paid on the date of signature of this Agreement
• 140.000.-EUR net will be paid in total in ten (10) equal installments between 30 September
2024 - 30 June 2025 as 14.000.-EUR for each month.
Car & Accommodation: 10.000-EUR net will be paid for car and accommodation expenses in 10
installments from September 2024 to June 2025.
Bonus Payments
• In case the Club complete the season as champion at the end of the 2024/2025 football season
the Club will pay 20.000.-EUR bonus to the Player.
• In case of the player makes each score contribution in all official matches (goal & assist), the
Player will be entitled to 1.000.-EUR net bonus.
• The Club will provide two round fly tickets to the Player and wife.
[…]
All the bonus payments agreed in this Agreement will be calculated according to the ratio (i.e.
according to the pro-rata principle) to be found by taking into account the time played by the
Player in the official league competitions in the relevant season, and the Player will be entitled
to the said bonus in proportion to the duration of the competitions in which he took part.
All payments indicated in this Agreement are to be considered as "NET" payments. […]”
3.
In addition, article 5 of the Contract read as follows, quoted verbatim:
“[…] j) The Player agrees to sign and comply with all applicable the Bandirmaspor regulations,
policies and procedures including but not limited to, the Internal Disciplinary Regulations. The
Player hereby agrees that in case of a breach by the Player of his obligations set forth herein
and in the Internal Disciplinary Regulations, the Bandirmaspor shall be entitled to fine the Player
penal sum as declared and calculated by the Bandirmaspor's disciplinary regulations, and that
the Player shall pay this penal sum to the Bandirmaspor upon the receipt of the Bandirmaspor's
pg. 3
REF. FPSD-22298
written request, and that the Bandirmaspor shall be entitled to set off and compensate for this
sum from or out of the receivables the Player may have with the Bandirmaspor. Besides the fine
as set forth above, the Bandirmaspor is also entitled to seek remedy for any damage incurred
by the Bandirmaspor, including the loss of profit, in case the Player is in breach of his obligations
regarding the image rights.
k) The Player agrees to sign Internal Disciplinary Regulation of Bandirmaspor prior to the
beginning of the second half of football season 2024/25.
[…]
r) The Player accepts, declares and undertakes that the disciplinary instruction is an integral
part of this contract; in addition, the Club has notified him a copy of the disciplinary instruction
to be applied by the Club in the relevant season and that he will comply with this disciplinary
instruction. […]”
4.
On 13 May 2025, the Player got into a fight with a teammate during the Club’s training
session.
5.
On 17 May 2025, the Club sent the following correspondence to the Player, quoted
verbatim:
“[…] Subject: It consists of a request for your defense letter to be sent to our Club within 48 hours
due to your behavior contrary to the relevant articles of the Club Disciplinary Instructions of the
Bandirmaspor Club 2024/2025 Football Season.
EXPLANATIONS:
1- It has been observed that you started a verbal argument with your teammate Yasin Yagiz
Dilek during the team training held at our club's facilities on 13.05.2025 al 17:00 and then
physically intervened and fought with him. The moments were recorded by the CCTV cameras in
our club facilities. It has been determined that by exhibiting undisciplined behavior in the team
training, you have exhibited behaviors contrary to the Club Disciplinary Instructions of the
Bandirmaspor Club 2024/2025 Football Season and violated the relevant instruction articles.
2- Our Board of Directors has given you 48 hours to present your defense on this matter, and
you can send your defense letter including your reasons in writing to [email protected]
e-mail address. If you do not present your defense letter within the time limit, it will be deemed
that you have given your right to defense. […]”
6.
On 18 May 2025, the Player answered the latest correspondence from the Club,
acknowledging his altercation with his teammate, expressing regret for his conduct,
presenting his defense and pointing out that he only received a copy of the Club’s internal
disciplinary regulations in Turkish.
pg. 4
REF. FPSD-22298
7.
On 2 June 2025, the Club issued the following decision against the Player, quoted verbatim:
“It has been determined that our player Paulo Rafael Pereira Araujo engaged in a verbal dispute
with his teammate Yasin Yagiz Dilek during the team training session conducted at our club
facilities on 13.05.2025 at 17:00, subsequently escalating to physical contact and fighting. These
actions constitute a violation of the provisions of the Club Bandirma Spor 2024 / 2025 Football
Season Professional Football Internal Disciplinary Regulations, and it has been established that
the aforementioned Player has committed a disciplinary violation that disrupted the training
order. Due to the above-mentioned behavior of the Player, the Board of Directors has
unanimously decided to impose a fine of 5.185,18-EUR in accordance with Article 9.1 of the Club
Bandirma Spor 2024 / 2025 Football Season Professional Football Internal Disciplinary
Regulations, to deduct this amount from any receivables that have arisen or will arise from the
Club, and to notify the Turkish Football Federation (TFF; and other relevant parties in accordance
with Article 24/d of PFSTT.”
8.
On an unspecified date, the Club sent the following correspondence to the Player, quoted
verbatim:
“SUBJECT : This is the notification of the fine according to the decision of the Board of Directors
of the Club dated 02/06/2025 and numbered 2025/11 that it shall be notified to the TFF and the
relevant parties in accordance with the relevant provisions of the PFSTT.
EXPLANATIONS :
1- With the decision of the Board of Directors of the Club dated 02/06/2025 and numbered
2025/11 due to your engagement in a verbal dispute with your teammate Yasin Yagiz Dilek
during the team training session held at our club facilities on 13.05.2025 at 17:00, subsequently
escalating to physical contact and fighting, thereby exhibiting disciplinary misconduct during
team training, you have been fine 5.185,18-EUR in accordance with Article 9.1 of the “Club
Bandirma Spor 2024 / 2025 Football Season Professional Football Internal Disciplinary
Regulations”.
2- It has been decided that the fine imposed shall he deducted from your receivables that have
arisen or will arise from the Club, and that this matter shall be notified to the TFF and relevant
parties in accordance with Article 24/d of PFSTT.
3- The penalties subject to this warning notice have been imposed in accordance with the "Club
l3andirma Spor 2024 / 2025 Football Season Professional Football Internal Disciplinary
Regulations", which were delivered to the Player when the contract between the Player and the
Club was signed. We hereby declare that a copy of the “Club Bandirma Spor 2024 / 2025 Football
Season Professional Football Internal Disciplinary Regulations'' with the Player's signature is in
the Club's records. […]”
pg. 5
REF. FPSD-22298
9.
On 10 October 2025, the Claimant put the Respondent in default and requested payment
within 10 days of EUR 25,000 as outstanding remuneration under the Contract, i.e., EUR
14,000 as the monthly salary for June 2025, EUR 1,000 as the monthly car and
accommodation expenses for June 2025 and EUR 10,000 as bonuses for goals and assists.
10. On 17 October 2025, the Respondent answered the Claimant’s default notice as follows,
quoted verbatim:
“[…] Upon reviewing the notice of demand you sent on 10.10.2025, we see that you are claiming
an excessive amount. On 13.05.2025, due to your physical altercation and fighting with your
teammate Yasin Yagiz Dilek within the Club facilities, you were requested to submit a defense in
accordance with the Bandirma Spor Internal Disciplinary Regulations. Based on your defense
statement, the Bandmna Spor Kulubu Board of Directors imposed a fine of 5.185.18-EUR on you
in accordance with the relevant article of the Bandirmaspor Internal Disciplinary Regulations. In
this regard, the fine notice and the Board of Directors' Decision, along with their English
translations, were sent to you via email. The relevant documents have also been sent to the
Turkish Football Federation. The fine notice and the Board of Directors' decision are attached to
this response letter.
Upon review of the fine notice, it is stated that the fine imposed on you will be deducted from
your receivables that have arisen and will arise at the Club.
It appears that the relevant financial penalty was not taken into account when calculating the
amounts specified in the notice you sent to our Club. In light of all the above, we request that
you recalculate the financial penalty and send a notice containing the full and correct amounts
of the receivables.
We assure you that the payment will be made as soon as possible in relation to the new notice
you will send. […]”
II. Proceedings before FIFA
11. On 12 December 2025, the Claimant filed the claim at hand before FIFA. A summary of the
parties’ respective positions is detailed below.
a. Claim of the Claimant
12. In his claim, the Claimant stated that he is entitled to EUR 25,000 as outstanding
remuneration under the Contract, i.e., EUR 14,000 as the monthly salary for June 2025, EUR
1,000 as the monthly car and accommodation expenses for June 2025 and EUR 10,000 as
bonuses for goals and assists.
pg. 6
REF. FPSD-22298
13. In addition, the Claimant argued that the fine imposed on him by the Respondent should
be disregarded as it did not respect the principles of proportionality and gradation of
sanctions. The Claimant also pointed out that the Respondent only fined him after he
issued a default notice for outstanding remuneration, which should be considered a vain
attempt to reduce the amount owed.
14. Having stated the above, the Claimant’s requests for relief were the following:
“a) Orders BANDIRMASPOR KULUBU, Turkey, to pay to Mr Paulo Rafael Pereira Araújo, the
amount of EUR 25,000.00 (twenty-five thousand Euros).
b) As well as interests at a rate of 5% p.a. as from the day following the due date until the date
of effective payment.”
b. Reply of the Respondent
15. In its reply to the claim, the Respondent argued that it has fulfilled its financial obligations
towards the Claimant under the Contract.
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
16. First of all, the Single Judge of the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: the Single Judge)
analysed whether he was competent to deal with the case at hand. In this respect, he took
note that the present matter was presented to FIFA on 12 December 2025 and submitted
for decision on 18 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.
17. 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 Portuguese player and a Turkish club.
18. Subsequently, the Single Judge analysed which regulations should be applicable as to the
substance of the matter. In this respect, he 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-22298
b. Burden of proof
19. 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 he 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
20. 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 he will refer only to the facts, arguments and documentary evidence, which
he considered pertinent for assessing the matter at hand.
i. Main legal discussion and considerations
21. The Single Judge then moved to the substance of the matter and took note of the fact that
the Claimant disputes the payment of certain financial obligations by the Respondent as
per the Contract.
22. On one hand, the Single Judge acknowledged that, according to the Claimant, the fine
imposed on him by the Respondent should be disregarded and he is therefore entitled to
EUR 25,000 as outstanding remuneration under the Contract, i.e., EUR 14,000 as the
monthly salary for June 2025, EUR 1,000 as the monthly car and accommodation expenses
for June 2025 and EUR 10,000 as bonuses for goals and assists.
23. On the other hand, the Single Judge took note of the position of the Respondent, according
to which it has fulfilled its financial obligations towards the Claimant under the Contract.
24. In this context, the Single Judge acknowledged that his task was to determine, based on
the evidence presented by the parties, (i) whether the fine imposed by the Respondent on
the Claimant should be disregarded; (ii) whether the amounts claimed by the Claimant had
in fact remained unpaid by the Respondent; and, if so, (iii) whether the Respondent had a
valid justification for not having complied with its financial obligations.
25. Within this framework, the Single Judge established the following facts which remained
undisputed between the Player and the Club:
pg. 8
REF. FPSD-22298
•
On 13 May 2025, the Player got into a fight with a teammate during the Club’s
training session.
•
On 17 May 2025, the Club invited the Player to present his defense within 48 hours
regarding the events that occurred on 13 May 2025 during the Club’s training
session.
•
On 18 May 2025, the Player presented his defense to the Club regarding the events
that occurred on 13 May 2025 during the Club’s training session and informed the
Club that he only received a copy of the Club’s internal disciplinary regulations in
Turkish.
•
On 2 June 2025, the Club decided to impose a fine on the Player in the amount of
EUR 5,185.18 in accordance with article 9.1 of its Internal Disciplinary Regulations,
and to deduct this amount from the Player’s remuneration.
26. In light of the aforementioned facts, the Single Judge emphasised that, based on the
jurisprudence of the Football Tribunal, as a general rule, the imposition of a fine, or any
other available financial sanction in general, shall not be used by clubs as a means to set
off outstanding financial obligations towards players.
27. Nevertheless, the Single Judge recalled that, according to the established jurisprudence of
the Football Tribunal and of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (hereinafter: the CAS), as a
general rule, clubs can set off fines against the Player’s salary where an agreement
expressly allows set-off. However, the Single Judge stressed that the CAS has adopted a
restrictive approach in respect of offsetting fines against a player’s salary as any such setoff should not nullify entirely an employee’s right to a basic salary, or to be applied in an
abusive way (CAS 2018/A/5807).
28. In continuation, the Single Judge recalled the following wording of the Contract:
“[…] j) The Player agrees to sign and comply with all applicable the Bandirmaspor regulations,
policies and procedures including but not limited to, the Internal Disciplinary Regulations. The
Player hereby agrees that in case of a breach by the Player of his obligations set forth herein
and in the Internal Disciplinary Regulations, the Bandirmaspor shall be entitled to fine the Player
penal sum as declared and calculated by the Bandirmaspor's disciplinary regulations, and that
the Player shall pay this penal sum to the Bandirmaspor upon the receipt of the Bandirmaspor's
written request, and that the Bandirmaspor shall be entitled to set off and compensate for this
sum from or out of the receivables the Player may have with the Bandirmaspor. Besides the fine
as set forth above, the Bandirmaspor is also entitled to seek remedy for any damage incurred
by the Bandirmaspor, including the loss of profit, in case the Player is in breach of his obligations
regarding the image rights.
pg. 9
REF. FPSD-22298
k) The Player agrees to sign Internal Disciplinary Regulation of Bandirmaspor prior to the
beginning of the second half of football season 2024/25.
[…]
r) The Player accepts, declares and undertakes that the disciplinary instruction is an integral
part of this contract; in addition, the Club has notified him a copy of the disciplinary instruction
to be applied by the Club in the relevant season and that he will comply with this disciplinary
instruction. […]”
29. Based on the wording of the Contract, the Single Judge found that the Player appeared to
have agreed to comply with the Club’s Internal Disciplinary Regulations and that, if he
breached those regulations, the Club would be entitled to impose fines and deduct them
from his remuneration.
30. At this point, the Single Judge recalled the Player’s position that he was only provided with
a Turkish version of the Club’s Internal Disciplinary Regulations. Moreover, the Single Judge
observed that the documentation on file did not include a copy of said regulations.
31. In the Single Judge’s view, although the Player, by signing the Contract, agreed to comply
with the Club’s Internal Disciplinary Regulations, there is no evidence that he ever actually
received them. In this respect, the Single Judge stressed that the Club did not provide a
version signed by the Player, which strongly suggests that he was not aware of their
content. Moreover, the Single Judge pointed out that, although the Contract stipulated that
the Club’s Internal Disciplinary Regulations were an integral part of it, those regulations
were in fact not attached thereto.
32. With the above considerations in mind, and in the absence of any further evidence
provided by the Club, the Single Judge found it unreasonable to assume that a generic
clause in the Contract sufficed to establish the Player’s acceptance of the Club’s Internal
Disciplinary Regulations. In other words, the Single Judge concluded that the Club failed to
meet its burden of proving the existence of an agreement expressly allowing the set-off of
fines.
33. For the sake of completeness, the Single Judge underlined that, even if the Player was
deemed to have accepted the Club’s Internal Disciplinary Regulations by signing the
Contract, the evidence on file does not demonstrate that the Club conducted a proper
disciplinary process. In particular, the Single Judge considered that less stringent sanctions
were available to the Club and should have been applied before imposing a fine on the
Player equivalent to 37% of his monthly salary for a first alleged offense of this nature.
Additionally, the Single Judge emphasised that the Club provided the Player with an
extremely short deadline to respond to its allegations in its correspondence dated 17 May
2025, without offering him the opportunity to be heard in person or through a formal
meeting.
pg. 10
REF. FPSD-22298
34. Based on the foregoing and the evidence on file, the Single Judge held that the Club failed
to demonstrate that the Player’s right to be heard was duly respected, notwithstanding the
Player’s written response to its allegations. Accordingly, the Single Judge determined that
the Club cannot validly deduct the fine of EUR 5,185.18 from the Player’s remuneration.
35. The Single Judge further recalled 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 with
the Claimant. Nonetheless, the Single Judge observed that the Respondent failed to provide
any evidence to prove the payment of the amounts claimed as outstanding by the Claimant.
36. Consequently, in line with the general legal principle of pacta sunt servanda, and
considering both the evidence on file and the Club’s position, which did not dispute the
Player’s entitlement to EUR 10,000 in bonuses for goals and assists during the 2024/2025
season, the Single Judge decided that the Club is liable to pay the following outstanding
amounts to the Player under the Contract:
•
EUR 14,000 as the monthly salary for June 2025;
•
EUR 1,000 as the monthly car and accommodation expenses for June 2025; and
•
EUR 10,000 as bonuses for goals and assists in the season 2024/2025.
37. In addition, taking into consideration the Claimant’s request as well as the constant practice
of the Football Tribunal in this regard, the Single Judge decided to award the Claimant
interest at the rate of 5% p.a. on the outstanding amounts under the Contract as from 1
July 2025 until the date of effective payment.
ii. Art. 12bis of the Regulations
38. 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.
39. 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.
40. 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.
41. The Single Judge further established that, by virtue of art. 12bis par. 4 of the Regulations
he has competence to impose sanctions on the club. On account of the above and bearing
in mind that this is the fourth offense by the Respondent within the last two years, the
pg. 11
REF. FPSD-22298
Single Judge decided to impose a fine of USD 7,500 on the Respondent in accordance with
art. 12bis par. 4 lit. c) of the Regulations.
42. 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
43. 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.
44. 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.
45. 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.
46. 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.
47. 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
48. 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.
pg. 12
REF. FPSD-22298
49. 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.
50. Lastly, the Single Judge concluded his deliberations by rejecting any other requests for
relief made by any of the parties.
pg. 13
REF. FPSD-22298
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Paulo Rafael Pereira Araujo, is accepted.
2.
The Respondent, Royal Hastanesi Bandirmaspor, must pay to the Claimant EUR 25,000 as
outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 July 2025 until the date of
effective payment.
3.
A fine in the amount of USD 7,500 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-22298:
UBS Zurich
Account number 230-366677.61N (FIFA Players’ Status)
Clearing number 230
IBAN: CH12 0023 0230 3666 7761 N
SWIFT: UBSWCHZH80A
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. 14
REF. FPSD-22298
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. 15