Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF. FPSD-14891
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 12 December 2024
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the player Suliman
Ezalla Suliman Hamouda
COMPOSITION:
Lívia SILVA KÄGI (Brazil & Switzerland), Deputy Chairwoman
Alejandro ATILIO TARABORELLI (Argentina & Italy), Member
Roy VERMEER (The Netherlands), Member
CLAIMANT:
Suliman Ezalla Suliman Hamouda, Sudan
Represented by Islam Hisham
RESPONDENT:
Abel Ashher Club, Libya
pg. 2
REF. FPSD-14891
I. Facts of the case
1.
Allegedly, on 22 February 2024, the Libyan club Abel Ashher (hereinafter: Respondent or
Club) made a Player Contract Offer (hereinafter: the offer) to the Sudanese player Suliman
Ezzalla Suliman Hamouda (hereinafter: Claimant or Player). The Claimant and the
Respondent are jointly referred as the parties.
2.
The English translation of the offer reads (quoted verbatim):
“Re: A Player Contract Offer
We are pleased to offer you a contract in our club as per the following terms and conditions:
The contract value for season 2023-2024 is five thousand dollars shall be paid upon signing the
contract.
1- round trip flight tickets.
2- winning rewards for matches as per the club’s regulations and internal policy.
The player shall pass through medical examination.
The player is subject to the Libyan Football Association’s regulations and the club’s internal
policy.
The player shall be marketed for in the Libyan Premier League.”
3.
On 24 February 2024, the Respondent sent a loan offer to the Sudanese club Al Hilal
(hereinafter: Al Hilal) for the Player.
4.
On 27 February 2024, the Claimant, the Respondent and Al Hilal signed a loan contract
(hereinafter: the loan contract) valid as from 27 February 2024 to 10 July 2024.
5.
According to the information available in TMS, on 27 March 2024, the Libyan Football
Federation acting on behalf of the Respondent started the instruction to obtain the ITC of
the Player.
6.
On 8 April 2024 the ITC was completed.
7.
By email correspondence dated 30 April 2024, the Claimant sent a warning notice to the
Respondent informing the Club that not registering the Player and not paying him the
agreed amount of USD 5,000 an early termination of their employment relationship.
Therefore, the Player granted a deadline of 15 days to remedy these breaches and to
provide proof of the Player’s registration.
pg. 3
REF. FPSD-14891
8.
By email correspondence dated 6 June 2024 the Claimant unilaterally terminated the
alleged employment relationship based on article 14 and 14bis of the RSTP.
II. Proceedings before FIFA
9.
On 9 June 2024, the Claimant lodged a claim against the Respondent in front of FIFA.
a. Position of the Claimant
10. In his claim, the Claimant held that the Respondent did not register him in the team’s list
within the transfer window.
11. According to the Claimant, the Club was obliged to pay him USD 5,000 upon signing the
offer.
12. The Claimant argued that the Club failed to comply with the above-mentioned payment.
13. The Claimant asserted that on 30 April 2024, he sent a warning notice to the Respondent
to inform it that not registering him and failing to comply with the agreed payment
constituted a serious breach of its obligations and it was considered as an early termination
of their employment relationship.
14. Consequently, on 6 June 2024, the Claimant sent a letter to the Respondent terminating
the alleged employment relationship based on articles 14 and 14bis of the regulations.
15. The Claimant cited CAS and FIFA’s jurisprudence to support his argument that the
employment relationship was terminated with just cause.
16. Lastly, the Claimant requested FIFA (quoted verbatim):
In view of all the above, we request this Honorable Chamber:
1) To accept this claim against the Respondent.
2) To consider the Respondent liable for breach without just cause of the Employment Contract.
3) To condemn the Respondent to pay the Claimant the outstanding Payment based on articles
12 bis and 14 bis in the amount of USD 5000-/ “five thousand US dollars” that should have been
paid upon signing the Contract on 27 February 2024 plus 5% as an interest to be calculated as
from 27 February 2024.
pg. 4
REF. FPSD-14891
4) To condemn the Respondent to pay the Claimant an additional head of compensation under
the specificity of sport as provided for under FIFA RSTP equivalent to 3 months' salaries in
amount of USD 3,000-/ “three thousand dollars” as we explained above.
5) To condemn the Respondent to pay interests at a rate of five percent (5%) per annum over
entire amounts requested from the due date of each payment until the date of the effective
payment.
6) To ban the Respondent from registering any new players, either nationally or internationally,
for two registration periods under article 17, paragraph 4 of the FIFA RSTP; AND
7) To impose the Respondent whatever sanctions this honorable Chamber deems fit in
accordance with article 12 bis of the FIFA RSTP.
8) To fix a sum of USD (3,000-/) “five thousand dollars”, to be paid by the Respondent to the
Claimant, to help the payment of its legal fees and costs.
b. Position of the Respondent
17. Despite being invited to provide its response, the Respondent failed to reply to the claim.
pg. 5
REF. FPSD-14891
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
18. 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 9 June 2024 and submitted for decision on 12
December 2024. 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.
19. 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 (October 2024 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 Sudanese player
and a Libyan club.
20. 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. 26 par. 1
and 2 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (October 2024 edition), and
considering that the present claim was lodged on 9 June 2024, the June 2024 edition of said
regulations (hereinafter: the Regulations) is applicable to the matter at hand as to the
substance.
b. Burden of proof
21. 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
22. 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. 6
REF. FPSD-14891
i. Main legal discussion and considerations
23. The Chamber then moved to the substance of the matter, and took note of the fact that
the Claimant argues that the parties had a valid and binding employment contract, and
that he terminated the employment relationship due to outstanding remuneration and
because the Club did not register him.
24. In this context, the Chamber acknowledged that its task was to determine whether the
offer provided by the Claimant constituted a valid and binding employment contract, and,
if so, whether the Claimant had just cause to terminate the employment relationship.
25. Since the Club did not provide its position on the claim, the Chamber considered that its
decision should be taken based on the documentation already in the file (i.e., the
statements and documents presented by the Claimant) (cf., art. 21, par. 1 of the Procedural
Rules).
I.
Was the offer a valid and binding employment contract?
26. First, the Chamber recalled that the well-established jurisprudence of the DRC dictates that,
in order for an employment contract to be considered valid and binding, in addition to the
consent of the employer and the employee, it must contain the essential elements
(essentialia negotii) of an employment contract, i.e., the parties to the contract and their
function, the duration of the employment relationship and the remuneration to be paid by
the employer to the employee.
27. In this regard, the Chamber noted that: (i) the offer had the consent of the parties along
with the signature of both; (ii) it was clearly established that the Claimant’s function was to
perform for the Club as a player in the Libyan Premier League and the Respondent was
obliged to remunerate the Claimant for his services; (iii) as to the duration, it is established
that the employment relationship would last for the duration of the 2023-2024 season.
Moreover, the loan contract provides a specific term from 27 February 2024 to 10 July 2024;
(iv) A total contract value of USD 5,000 to be paid upon signing is included as remuneration;
(v) the offer was confirmed by the execution of the loan agreement.
28. Therefore, the Chamber decided that the offer had all the essential elements to be
considered a valid and binding employment contract.
II.
Did the Player have just cause to terminate the employment relationship?
29. The Chamber noted that, according to the Claimant, the Respondent had failed to pay his
remuneration corresponding to USD 5,000 upon signing the offer.
pg. 7
REF. FPSD-14891
30. In this regard, the Chamber pointed out that the Respondent bore the burden of proving
that it indeed complied with the financial terms of the offer. Moreover, by failing to reply
to the claim, the Club did not provide any evidence that proved it paid the amounts claimed
as outstanding by the Claimant. Thus, the Chamber highlighted that it shall be considered
that the Club owed the Player USD 5,000, which represented the entire value of the contract
itself.
31. Furthermore, the Chamber observed that, on 30 April 2024, sent a notice of default
requesting the payment of USD 5,000 within 15 days.
32. Moreover, the Chamber underlined that, on 6 June 2024, i.e., more than 15 days after
sending the notice of default, the Player terminated his employment relationship because
of the breaches committed by the Club.
33. Consequently, the Chamber considered that the two conditions of article 14bis were met:
the Club failed to pay the Player more than two salaries, and the Player put the Club in
default and granted a deadline of 15 days to fully comply with its financial obligations.
34. Hence, the Chamber concluded that the Claimant had just cause to unilaterally terminate
the contract, based on article 14bis of the Regulations.
ii. Consequences
I.
Outstanding remuneration:
35. The Chamber observed that the outstanding remuneration at the time of termination,
coupled with the specific requests for relief of the Player is USD 5,000.
36. As a consequence, and in accordance with the general legal principle of pacta sunt servanda,
the Chamber decided that the Respondent is liable to pay to the Claimant the amounts
which were outstanding under the contract at the moment of the termination, i.e. USD
5,000.
37. In addition, 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. on the outstanding amounts as from 28 February 2024 until the date of effective
payment.
38. Moreover, the Chamber highlighted that the total value of the offer was due upon the
signing of the offer amounting to USD 5,000 which the Chamber decided to award as
outstanding remuneration.
pg. 8
REF. FPSD-14891
39. As a consequence, the members of the Chamber determined that no compensation was
to be awarded.
iii. Compliance with monetary decisions
40. 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.
41. 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.
42. 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.
43. 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.
44. 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
45. 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.
46. 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.
pg. 9
REF. FPSD-14891
47. Lastly, the DRC concluded its deliberations by rejecting any other requests for relief made
by any of the parties.
pg. 10
REF. FPSD-14891
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Suliman Ezalla Suliman Hamouda, is partially accepted.
2.
The Respondent, Abel Ashher Club, must pay to the Claimant the following amount(s):
-
USD 5,000 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 28 February
2024 until the date of effective payment.
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. 11
REF. FPSD-14891
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 – 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. 12