Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF. FPSD-10502
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 28 July 2023
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning
the player Valentin Gheorghe
BY:
Angela Collins (Australia), Single Judge of the DRC
CLAIMANT:
Valentin Gheorghe, Romania
Represented by AFAN Romania
RESPONDENT:
BEREKET SİGORTA UMRANİYESPOR, Türkiye
Represented by Ercan Sevdimbaş
pg. 2
REF. FPSD-10502
I. Facts of the case
1.
In August 2022, the Romanian player, Valentin Gheorghe (hereinafter: Claimant or player)
and the Turkish club, BEREKET SİGORTA UMRANİYESPOR (hereinafter: club or Respondent)
concluded an employment contract (hereinafter: contract) valid as from August 2022 until
31 May 2023.
2.
According to the contract, the Respondent undertook to pay the Claimant the following
monies (total amount of EUR 200,000):
- EUR 15,000 as “down payment” on 31 August 2022;
- EUR 15,000 as “guarantee payment” on 30 October 2022;
- EUR 17,000 in ten equal instalments between August 2022 and May 2023 (10x EUR
17,000).
II. Proceedings before FIFA
3.
On 9 June 2023, the Claimant filed the claim at hand before FIFA. A brief summary of the
position of the parties is detailed in continuation.
a. Position of the Claimant
4.
In his claim, the Claimant requested payment of EUR 68,000, corresponding to the monthly
instalments between February 2023 and May 2023 (4x EUR 17,000).
5.
In this context, the player argued that the claimed amounts remained outstanding at the
end of the contractual relationship.
b. Position of the Respondent
6.
In its reply, the Respondent argued that it remitted the total amount of EUR 132,081.92
and that therefore the amount of EUR 67,918.08 remained outstanding.
7.
In support of its allegation, the club submitted receipts for the payments of EUR 132,081.92
to the player in total.
8.
The club held that such amount remained unpaid due to the “economical and political crisis
in Turkey”.
pg. 3
REF. FPSD-10502
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
10. First of all, the Single Judge (hereinafter also referred to as 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 9 June 2023 and submitted for decision on 28 July
2023. Taking into account the wording of art. 34 of the March 2023 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.
11. Subsequently, the Single Judge referred to art. 2 par. 1 and art. 24 par. 1 lit. a) 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 (May 2023
edition), she is competent to deal with the matter at stake, which concerns an employmentrelated dispute with an international dimension between a player and a club.
12. 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. 26 par.
1 and 2 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (May 2023 edition), and
considering that the present claim was lodged on 9 June 2023, the May 2023 edition of said
regulations (hereinafter: the Regulations) is applicable to the matter at hand as to the
substance.
b. Burden of proof
13. 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 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
14. Her competence and the applicable regulations having been established, 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 it will refer only to the facts, arguments and documentary evidence, which
it considered pertinent for the assessment of the matter at hand.
pg. 4
REF. FPSD-10502
i. Main legal discussion and considerations
15. The foregoing having been established, the Single Judge moved to the substance of the
matter, and took note of the fact that the matter at hand concerns a claim for outstanding
remuneration of a player against a club.
16. In this context, the Single Judge acknowledged that her task was to decide if the player is
entitled to the claimed amounts and if yes, to what extent.
17. The Single Judge acknowledged that according to the player, the club failed to remit the
amount of EUR 68,000.
18. On the other hand, the Single Judge duly noted that the Respondent argued that only the
amount of EUR 67,918.08 remained outstanding. The club provided receipts for payments,
resulting in debt of EUR 67,918.08. The Respondent further argued that said amount
remained outstanding since the club is facing financial difficulties in connection with an
earthquake.
19. The Single Judge wished to emphasize that the Respondent bore the burden of proving
that it indeed complied with the financial terms of the contract concluded between the
parties, which is in the matter at hand undisputedly not the case.
20. Subsequently, the Single Judge pointed out that financial difficulties, even when in
connection with an earthquake, are no reason to disregard its financial obligations and
shall not be accepted, in accordance with the jurisprudence of the Football Tribunal.
21. As a consequence, and in accordance with the general legal principle of pacta sunt servanda,
taking into account the payment receipts provided by the club, the Single Judge decided to
award the player the total amount of EUR 67,918.08, corresponding to the residual part of
the last four monthly salary instalments.
ii. Compliance with monetary decisions
22. 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.
23. 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.
pg. 5
REF. FPSD-10502
24. 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.
25. 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.
26. 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
27. 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 Chamber decided that no procedural costs were to be
imposed on the parties.
28. 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.
29. Lastly, the Single Judge concluded its deliberations by rejecting any other requests for relief
made by any of the parties.
pg. 6
REF. FPSD-10502
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Valentin Gheorghe, is partially accepted.
2.
The Respondent, BEREKET SİGORTA UMRANİYESPOR, must pay to the Claimant the amount
of EUR 67,918.08 as outstanding remuneration.
3.
Any further claims of the Claimant are rejected.
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. 7
REF. FPSD-10502
NOTE RELATED TO THE APPEAL PROCEDURE:
According to article 57 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. article 17 of the Procedural Rules Governing the Football
Tribunal).
CONTACT INFORMATION
Fédération Internationale de Football Association
FIFA-Strasse 20 P.O. Box 8044 Zurich Switzerland
www.fifa.com | legal.fifa.com | [email protected] | T: +41 (0)43 222 7777
pg. 8