Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF. FPSD-22362
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 31 March 2026
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the player
Emmanuel Apeh
COMPOSITION:
Frans DE WEGER (The Netherlands), Chairperson
Peter LUKASEK (Slovakia), Member
Dana MOHAMED AL-NOAIMI (Qatar), Member
CLAIMANT:
Emmanuel Apeh, Nigeria
Represented by Luis Llorente Otones
RESPONDENT:
Ettihad Alexandria, Egypt
Represented by Tamer Sami Ahmed
pg. 2
REF. FPSD-22362
I. Facts of the case
1.
On 27 September 2024, the Nigerian player, Emmanuel Apeh (hereinafter: the Player or the
Claimant) and the Egyptian club, Ettihad Alexandria (hereinafter: the Club or the Respondent)
entered into an employment contract (hereinafter: the Contract) valid from 27 September
2024 until the end of 2025/2026 season, which, according to the information available in
the Transfer Matching System (TMS), ended on 31 May 2026.
2.
Art. 3 of the Contract provided, quoted verbatim:
“3.1. The Player shall be entitled to receive the following net amounts from Al-Ittihad for
the entire duration of the employment contract:
(a) 2024/2025 season: US $ 170,000 (one hundred and seventy thousand United States
Dollars) net of taxes expenses, payable as follows:
(i)
(ii)
US $ 30,000.00 (thirty thousand United States Dollars) within 24 hours of
signing the employment contract;
US $ 140,000.00 (one hundred and forty thousand United States Dollars)
payable in ten equal and consecutive instalments of USD$ 14,000.00 (fourteen
thousand United States Dollars), each, payable on the last day of each month
commencing on September 2024 and ending on June 2025;
3.2. The Player shall be entitled to receive the following net amounts from Al-Ittihad for
the entire duration of the employment contract:
(b) 2024/2025 season: US $ 185,000 (one hundred and eighty-five thousand United States
Dollars) net of taxes expenses, payable as follows:
(iii)
(iv)
US $ 45,000.00 (forty-five thousand United States Dollars) on or before 30
August 2025;
US $ 140,000.00 (one hundred and forty thousand United States Dollars)
payable in ten equal and consecutive instalments of USD$ 14,000.00 (fourteen
thousand United States Dollars), each, payable on the last day of each month
commencing on September 2025 and ending on June 2026;
3.2. The PLAYER shall be entitled to a net bonus of US$ 5,000 (five thousand United States
Dollars) per each set of 5 (five) goals and The player gets $ 10,000 if he scores 12 goals
scored by him in official matches of the CLUB.
3.3. The PLAYER shall be entitled to a net bonus of US$ 5,000 (five thousand United States
Dollars) per each set of 7 (seven) assistances that he makes in official matches of the CLUB.
3.4 All bonuses shall be paid within 15 (fifteen) days of their achievement.”
pg. 3
REF. FPSD-22362
3.
As per art. 6 of the Contract, the Club undertook to provide the Player a furnished
apartment for him and his family, as well as a suitable car, two round-trip flight tickets
Madrid-Cairo-Madrid for him or his family members, and the residence and visa taxes
expenses.
4.
On 29 May 2025, the Player and the Club signed a termination agreement (hereinafter: the
Termination Agreement) which provides, quoted verbatim:
“This Termination Agreement ("Agreement”) is entered into by and between:
1. Al Ittihad Alexandria Club ("the Club”), represented by its President, Mr. Mohamed
Moselhi.
2. Mr. Emmanuel Apeh, a Nigerian football player, born on 25 October 1996, holding
passport no. 802953186 (“the Player”).
Together referred to as the "Parties”
Clause 1 -Termination of Employment
The Parties agree to mutually terminate the employment contract between the Player and
the Club, with effect from 29 May 2025.
Clause 2 - Financial Settlement
1. The Club acknowledges its obligation to pay the Player a total settlement amount of
USD 70,000 (seventy thousand US dollars).
2. The payment shall be made as follows:
- Advance Payment: USD 40,000 upon signing this agreement (29 May 2025).
- Remaining Balance: USD 30,000 to be paid in five (5) equal monthly installments of USD
6,000 each, according to the following schedule:
- 1st Installment: 26 July 2025
- 2nd Installment: 26 August 2025
- 3rd Installment. 26 September 2025
- 4th Instalment: 26 October 2025
- 5th Installment: 26 November 2025
3. All payments shall be made via international bank transfer to the following account:
[voluntarily omitted]
Clause 3 – Release of Claims
Upon full receipt of the total USD 70,000, the Player agrees to irrevocably release the Club
pg. 4
REF. FPSD-22362
from any further financial or legal obligations arising from the previous employment
contract.
Clause 4 - Applicable Law and Jurisdiction
This agreement shall be governed by the FIFA Regulations.
Any dispute arising out of or relating to this agreement shall fall under the exclusive
jurisdiction of the FIFA Football Tribunal.
Clause 5 - Entire Agreement
This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding between the Parties regarding the
termination and supersedes any prior discussions or commitments.”
5.
On 6 October 2025, the Player, through his legal representative, sent a notice of default to
the Club requesting the payment of an amount of USD 30,000, corresponding to five
installments under the Termination Agreement. The Player granted the Club, until 22
October 2025, to proceed with payment.
6.
On 27 November 2024, the Player, again through his legal representative, sent a second
notice of default reiterating his previous request. The Player granted the Club an additional
deadline until 12 December 2025 to proceed with payment.
7.
On 30 November 2025, the Club answered the Player, stating that it was facing financial
difficulties and proposed to pay the outstanding USD 30,000 in four instalments from 20
December 2025 until 15 March 2026.
8.
On 1 December 2025, the Player through his legal representative rejected the Club’s
proposal.
9.
On 12 December 2025, and on 14 December, the Club asked for an extension to pay the
outstanding amounts until 19 December 2025.
10. On 15 December 2025, the Player, through his legal representative, rejected the request
for an extension of the deadline made by the Club.
11. On 16 December 2025, the Club made a payment of USD 30,000 to the Player.
12. On 29 September 2025, the Player signed a Contract with the Israeli club, Kiryat Yam F.C.
valid from 29 September 2025 until 31 May 2026 for a monthly salary of NIS 29,935 payable
on the 10th day of the following month.
pg. 5
REF. FPSD-22362
II. Proceedings before FIFA
13. On 16 December 2025, the Claimant filed the claim at hand before FIFA. A summary of the
parties’ respective positions is detailed below.
a. Position of the Claimant
14. The Player affirmed that he and the Respondent executed, on 27 September 2024, an
Additional Agreement to the Professional Football Player Contract, under which he was
engaged for two seasons until June 2026, with a salary of USD 170,000 for the 2024/25
season. He maintained that although he should have received ten monthly instalments of
USD 14,000 after receiving a USD 30,000 signing fee, the Club paid only five instalments
totalling USD 70,000 and did so with delays that he initially tolerated in good faith. He
further asserted that after the departure of the coach who had signed him, the Club sought
an amicable resolution, leading to the conclusion of a Mutual Termination Agreement on
29 May 2025.
15. The Player submitted that under Clause 2 of this Agreement, the Club acknowledged
USD 70,000 in outstanding salaries, payable through an advance of USD 40,000 at
signature, duly paid, and a remaining USD 30,000 to be settled in five monthly instalments
between July and November 2025. He stressed that none of the instalments was honoured.
After the first default, he attempted to contact the Club’s President on 10 September 2025
to remind him of the overdue payment but received no reply.
16. The Player contended that when successive instalments due in August and September
2025 remained unpaid, he was obliged to seek legal assistance. His counsel issued, on
6 October 2025, a formal notice of default, granting the Club 15 days to remedy the USD
30,000 default, expressly warning that failure to pay would trigger the consequences
foreseen in art. 3 of the Mutual Termination Agreement, namely, that the financial
obligations under the previous employment relationship (i.e., the 2025-2026 season salary
of USD 185,000) would remain fully enforceable. No response was received.
17. The Player further maintained that, although legally entitled to file a claim, he waited until
the expiration of the final contractual deadline (26 November 2025). When the Club again
failed to pay, his legal representative sent a second notice on 27 November 2025 granting
a final 15‑day grace period. Only after this communication did the Club respond, on 30
November 2025, proposing a new schedule extending payment until March 2026, an offer
the Player refused on 1 December 2025, citing the Club’s extensive pattern of
non‑compliance.
18. The Player asserted that, even on the last day of the grace period, 12 December 2025, the
Club did not comply, instead sending a “Letter of Good Intention” via a person claiming to
act as a lawyer for the Respondent, requesting yet another extension. This request,
repeated on 14 December 2025, was rejected on 15 December 2025. The Player affirmed
pg. 6
REF. FPSD-22362
that, at this stage, the Club was in definitive breach of the Termination Agreement. He
emphasised that the Club failed first to pay his contractual salaries, then failed again to
comply with the terms of the Mutual Termination Agreement, repeatedly ignored
communications, and ultimately demonstrated bad‑faith conduct that placed him in a
precarious financial situation.
19. The Player stressed that art. 3 of the Mutual Termination Agreement was conditional, as
only “upon full receipt” of the USD 70,000 would the Club be released from financial and
legal obligations arising from the employment relationship. Since the Respondent paid only
USD 40,000 and defaulted on the remaining USD 30,000, he argued that the release never
became effective, and therefore the salary for the 2025/26 season, USD 185,000, remained
due.
20. The Player therefore made the following request for relief, quoted verbatim:
“The Player therefore made the following request for relief, quoted verbatim:”
(i) PROCEDURAL REQUESTS
14. The Claimant requests that the FIFA Dispute Chamber shall:
a) Admit the present Claim, together with its exhibits, thus initiate the corresponding
procedure in accordance with article 12bis of the FIFA RSTP;
b) Duly inform the Respondent about this Claim providing Al-Ittihad with the opportunity
to file its answer;
c) Accept all documentary support enclosed to the present claim as documentary evidence
of the facts and merits stated in herein.
(ii) RELIEF SOUGHT
15. On the basis of the arguments and evidences provided by this Party, the
Claimant seeks the following relief from the FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber:
a) To condemn the Respondent to pay the Claimant the amount of USD 215,000, as
damages for not having fulfilled with its obligations according Clause 2 of the Mutual
Termination Agreement, USD 30,000 corresponding to the unfulfilled instalments of such
Agreement (correlated with the previous unpaid salaries) and USD 185,000 corresponding
to 2025/2026 season once the Respondent hasn´t fulfilled with its obligations under the
Agreement and that according the Clause 3 the financial and legal obligations arising from
the previous employment relationship hasn´t been released.
b) Subsidiarily, and in the unexpected event that the amount claimed above is not granted,
to condemn the Respondent to pay USD 30,000, that is, the amount unpaid in the
Agreement, plus the amount that, in the opinion of the DRC, is appropriate as damages in
accordance with the contracts provided and the actions of the Respondent in this matter.
pg. 7
REF. FPSD-22362
c) To condemn the Respondent to pay the Claimant the amount corresponding to FIVE
PER CENT (5%) interest p.a., on the aforesaid amount as from the date the Claimant put
the Respondent in default until the effective date of payment;
d) To impose on the Respondent a ban from registering any new players, either nationally
or internationally, pursuant to Article 12bis FIFA RSTP, as set forth in this Claim or any
other sanction deemed appropriate by the FIFA DRC.
e) To impose on the Respondent a ban from registering any new players, either nationally
or internationally, up until the due amount is paid to the Claimant, pursuant to Article 24
FIFA RSTP.
f) To condemn the Club to pay all costs related to the present proceedings, if any.”
b. Position of the Respondent
21. In its reply, the Club challenged the Player’s position.
22. The Club affirmed that the principal amount of USD 30,000 claimed by the Player had
already been fully settled. It stressed that the payment was executed and effectively
credited to the Player’s bank account on 23 December 2025, a fact expressly acknowledged
by the Player himself on the same date. On this basis, the Club maintained that the financial
claim concerning the principal had become moot in light of longstanding FIFA
jurisprudence, which holds that once the debt is settled, only potential default interest
remains in dispute.
23. The Club further asserted that, without prejudice and without recognizing any additional
liability, it accepted the obligation to pay default interest at the 5% annual rate consistently
applied by FIFA. It explained that it had calculated the interest for each of the five
instalments separately, running from the day after each contractual due date until the date
of actual payment on 23 December 2025. Based on this method, the Club declared that the
total interest amounted to USD 360.01, and it expressed readiness to pay this amount
immediately upon FIFA’s confirmation.
24. The Club equally maintained that it had acted in good faith and with transparency
throughout the contractual relationship and subsequent dispute. It highlighted that it had
settled the entire principal debt, accepted the applicable default interest, and
communicated openly with the Player, including by sending a Letter of Good Intent on 12
December 2025. In the Club’s view, these elements demonstrated its cooperation, bona
fide conduct, and the absence of any intention to delay or circumvent its obligations.
25. The Club additionally contended that any procedural consequences should remain
proportionate. It submitted that, since the debt was settled before adjudication and the
pg. 8
REF. FPSD-22362
Club had cooperated throughout, no punitive measures or excessive costs would be
justified under FIFA’s non-punitive dispute-resolution framework.
26. The Club therefore made the following request for relief, quoted verbatim:
“Acknowledge that the principal amount of USD 30,000 has been fully paid and received
by the Claimant;
Limit any remaining financial obligation exclusively to default interest at 5% p.a.,
calculated until 23 December 2025, in line with FIFA jurisprudence;
Take due note of the Respondent's good faith, cooperation, and voluntary compliance
when assessing procedural costs or any other measures;
Reject any further claims or relief exceeding the scope of default interest as unfounded,
disproportionate, and devoid of legal basis.”
c. Additional information sent by the Claimant
27. On 23 December 2025, the Player informed the FIFA general secretariat of having received
an amount of USD 30,000 from the Club.
pg. 9
REF. FPSD-22362
Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
28. First of all, the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: the Chamber or 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 16 December 2025 and submitted for decision
on 31 March 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.
29. 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 Nigerian player and an Egyptian club.
30. 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
31. 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 Transfer Matching System (TMS).
c. Merits of the dispute
32. 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. 10
REF. FPSD-22362
i. Main legal discussion and considerations
33. The Chamber then moved to the substance of the matter and took note of the fact that the
parties strongly dispute whether any amounts due under a termination agreement were
outstanding and if the failure to pay such an amount triggered a compensation.
34. In his initial claim, filed on 16 December 2025, the Player alleged that the Club had not paid
him an amount on USD 30,000 which was due in multiple instalments, but that it paid the
full amount, after the filing of the claim on 23 December 2025. The Player therefore
submitted that as per art. 3 of the Termination Agreement, the Club was not relieved from
claims under the Contract as the full amount was paid late, and after he filed the present
claim. The Player therefore requested the residual value of the Contract.
35. On the contrary, the Club submitted that all claims under the Contract were extinguished,
and that it paid the outstanding amount due under the Termination Agreement on 23
December 2025, thus the Club confirmed that should it be held liable, only the outstanding
interest should be awarded to the Player.
36. In this context, the Chamber acknowledged that its task was to determine whether the
Player is entitled to claim amounts arising from the residual value of the employment
contract, or if the claim is only limited to the amounts due under the Termination
Agreement and then assess the consequences thereof.
37. First, the Chamber recalled the wording of art. 1 of the Termination Agreement which
provided, quoted verbatim: “The Parties agree to mutually terminate the employment contract
between the Player and the Club, with effect from 29 May 2025.”
38. In light of the above provision, the Chamber observed that it is undisputed that the parties
have mutually agreed to terminate the Contract and to the financial terms of the
termination. In the absence of a unilateral termination of the Contract, art. 17 of the
Regulations in inapplicable. Therefore, the Chamber determined that its analysis would be
limited to the terms of the Termination Agreement.
39. The Chamber then turned its attention to the outstanding amounts and observed that both
parties have acknowledged that the outstanding amount of USD 30,000, initially claimed
by the Player, had been paid in full, in one lump sum, by the Club on 23 December 2025.
40. Consequently, the Chamber determined that there were no more outstanding amounts
due under the Termination Agreement.
41. Nonetheless, as admitted by the Club, the Chamber observed that the Club paid the
amounts late.
pg. 11
REF. FPSD-22362
42. Thus, as per the admission of the Club, taking into consideration the Claimant’s request as
well as the constant practice of the Chamber in this regard, the latter decided to award the
Claimant interest at the rate of 5% p.a.. over the amount of USD 30,000 as follows:
- 5% interest p.a over the amount of USD 6,000 as from 27 July 2025 until 23
December 2025;
- 5% interest p.a over the amount of USD 6,000 as from 27 August 2025 until 23
December 2025;
- 5% interest p.a over the amount of USD 6,000 as from 27 September 2025 until 23
December 2025
- 5% interest p.a over the amount of USD 6,000 as from 27 October 2025 until 23
December 2025; and
- 5% interest p.a over the amount of USD 6,000 as from 27 November 2025 until 23
December 2025.
ii. Art. 12bis of the Regulations
43. The Chamber 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.
44. To this end, the Chamber 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.
45. Accordingly, the Chamber 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.
46. The Chamber further established that, by virtue of art. 12bis par. 4 of the Regulations the
Chamber has competence to impose sanctions on the club. On account of the above, and
bearing in mind that this is the first offense by the Respondent within the last two years,
the Chamber decided to impose a warning on the Respondent in accordance with art. 12bis
par. 4 lit. a) of the Regulations.
47. The Chamber 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.
pg. 12
REF. FPSD-22362
iii. Compliance with monetary decisions
48. 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.
49. 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.
50. Therefore, bearing in mind the above, the DRC 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.
51. 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.
52. The DRC 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
53. 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.
54. 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.
55. Lastly, the DRC concluded its deliberations by rejecting any other requests for relief made
by any of the parties.
pg. 13
REF. FPSD-22362
Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Emmanuel Apeh, is partially accepted.
2.
The Respondent, Ettihad Alexandria, must pay to the Claimant the following amounts:
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 6,000 as from 27 July 2025 until 23
December 2025;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 6,000 as from 27 August 2025 until 23
December 2025;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 6,000 as from 27 September 2025 until 23
December 2025;
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 6,000 as from 27 October 2025 until 23
December 2025; and
- 5% interest p.a. over the amount of USD 6,000 as from 27 November 2025 until 23
December 2025.
3.
Any further claims of the Claimant are rejected.
4.
A warning is imposed on the Respondent.
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. 14
REF. FPSD-22362
8.
This decision is rendered without costs.
For the Football Tribunal:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
pg. 15
REF. FPSD-22362
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. 16