Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF. FPSD-17639
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 24 April 2025
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the player Amer Hiros
COMPOSITION:
Frans DE WEGER (The Netherlands), Chairperson
Jon NEWMAN (USA), Member
Mario FLORES CHEMOR (Mexico), Member
CLAIMANT:
Amer Hiros, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Represented by Dupovac Feđa
RESPONDENT:
HNK Sibenik, Croatia
Represented by Dev Kumar Parmar
pg. 2
REF. FPSD-17639
I. Facts of the case
1.
On 23 April 2024, the Bosnian player Amer Hiros (hereinafter: the Claimant or the Player)
and the Croatian club HNK Sibenik (hereinafter: the Respondent or the Club) concluded an
agreement (hereinafter: the Agreement) to settle their financial obligations.
2.
The Agreement read as follows:
“Article 1.
The contracting parties agree that they were in a contractual relationship based on the Player
Transfer Agreement dated January 23, 2023. [sic] which was concluded for the period from
01.23.2023. [sic] until June 30, 2023. [sic] year.
Article 2.
The contracting parties agree that the Club has an outstanding debt due to the Player in the
amount of EUR 18,654.00 on the date of the conclusion of this Agreement, which it undertakes
to pay as follows:
-The amount of EUR 3,000.00 until May 6, 2024. [sic] year;
-The amount of EUR 3,218.00 until May 31, 2024. [sic] year;
-The amount of EUR 6,218.00 until July 1, 2024. [sic] year;
-The amount of EUR 6,218.00 until August 15, 2024. [sic] year.
The contracting parties agree that the Club will pay the player an additional amount of EUR
100.00 for each day of delay in the agreed installments [sic] from the previous paragraph, if the
installment [sic] delay exceeds a period of 15 (fifteen) days. […]
Article 3.
By signing this Agreement, the Player confirms that, apart from the claims from Article 2 of this
Agreement, he has no other or further claims against the Club on any basis.
Article 4.
The contracting parties agree that this Agreement and all possible annexes to the same or other
legal acts that will be created based on this Agreement are interpreted in accordance with the
provisions of the Law on Obligations.
This Agreement supersedes all previous agreements between the contracting parties regarding
the subject matter of this Agreement. There are no additional agreements, oral or written.
Any amendments or additions to this Agreement must be in the same form as this Agreement to
be valid. […]”
pg. 3
REF. FPSD-17639
3.
On 29 April 2024, the Respondent remitted EUR 3,000 to the Claimant.
4.
On 15 July 2024, the Respondent remitted EUR 3,218 to the Claimant.
5.
On 6 September 2024, the Respondent remitted EUR 3,218 to the Claimant.
6.
On 10 October 2024, the Respondent remitted EUR 3,218 to the Claimant.
7.
On 24 December 2024, the Respondent remitted EUR 6,000 to the Claimant.
8.
On 27 December 2024, the Respondent informed the Union of Professional Footballers of
Bosnia and Herzegovina that it had paid the last instalment of the Agreement.
II. Proceedings before FIFA
9.
On 31 December 2024, the Claimant filed the claim at hand before FIFA. A summary of the
parties’ respective positions is detailed below.
a. Position of the Claimant
10. It is the position of the Claimant that the Respondent failed to remit the last instalment of
the Agreement.
11. The Claimant’s requests for relief were the following:
“1. The claim lodged by the Claimant is accepted.
2. The Respondent shall pay the amount of 6.000,00 EUR plus 5% interest p.a. as from the
relevant payment dates until the date of effective payment.
3. The Respondent shall pay the amount of 2.000,00 EUR as contractual penalty for late payment
for the period of 15 June – 5 July 2024;
5. [sic] The Respondent shall pay the amount 8.800,00 EUR as contractual penalty for late
payment for the period of 15 July – 11 October 2024;
6. [sic] The Respondent shall pay the amount of 100,00 EUR per day as contractual penalty for
late payment starting from 1 September 2024 until the date of effective payment.
7. [sic] In the event that the above-mentioned amount is not paid within the stated deadline, the
present matter shall be submitted to FIFA’s Disciplinary Committee, so that the necessary
disciplinary sanctions may be imposed.”
pg. 4
REF. FPSD-17639
b. Position of the Respondent
12. It is the position of the Respondent that it fulfilled its financial obligations under the
Agreement, as it remitted the Claimant EUR 18,654, i.e. EUR 3,000 on 29 April 2024, EUR
3,218 on 15 July 2024, EUR 3,218 on 6 September 2024, EUR 3,218 on 10 October 2024 and
EUR 6,000 on 24 December 2024.
13. In addition, the Respondent argued that the contractual penalty stipulated in article 2 of
the Agreement is null and void as it is invalid and illegal under the relevant national law of
Croatia, namely the Croatian Obligations Act. In this regard, the Respondent noted that the
contractual penalty is excessive, abusive and disproportionate in accordance with the
jurisprudence of FIFA and CAS. Therefore, the Respondent stated that should the Dispute
Resolution Chamber of FIFA determine that a contractual penalty is due, it should be
reduced to a rate of 5% p.a. on solely the delayed payments made by the Club as from the
relevant due dates.
14. Lastly, the Respondent argued that article 12bis of the Regulations does not apply to this
case as the Claimant failed to send it a default notice.
c. Replica of the Claimant
15. In his replica, the Claimant acknowledged receipt of the payment of EUR 6,000 made by the
Club on 24 December 2024.
16. In addition, the Claimant argued that Croatian law is not applicable to the present matter,
as there is no reference to this effect in the Agreement.
17. Lastly, the Claimant argued the validity of the contractual penalty of the Agreement as it
was freely agreed with the Respondent.
18. On account of the above, the Claimant amended his claim and requested EUR 9,100 as the
contractual penalty for the late payment of the last instalment of the Agreement.
d. Duplica of the Respondent
19. In its duplica, the Respondent reiterated its initial position, noting the applicability of
Croatian Law to the present matter, the invalidity of article 2 of the Agreement and the
non-applicability of article 12bis of the Regulations.
pg. 5
REF. FPSD-17639
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
20. 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 31 December 2024 and submitted for decision
on 24 April 2025. Taking into account the wording of art. 31 and 34 of the January 2025
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.
21. 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), 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 Bosnian player
and a Croatian club.
22. 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 January 2025 edition of the Regulations is applicable to the matter at hand
as to the substance.
b. Burden of proof
23. 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
24. 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-17639
i. Main legal discussion and considerations
25. As a preliminary remark, the Chamber observed that the Agreement on file is not signed
by the Respondent. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Chamber considered the
Agreement for the purposes of assessing the present matter, on the basis of the evidence
provided by the Claimant as to its validity, in particular the exchange of communications
with the Respondent, which was not disputed by the latter.
26. The Chamber then moved to the substance of the matter, and took note of the fact that
the parties strongly dispute the payment of certain financial obligations by the Respondent
as per the contractual penalty of the Agreement. That said, the Chamber acknowledged
that the payment of all instalments provided for in the Agreement is no longer disputed
between the parties, as in his replica, the Claimant acknowledged having received, on 24
December 2024, the payment corresponding to the last instalment of the Agreement.
27. In particular, the Chamber noted that, according to the Claimant, he is entitled to the
contractual penalty of EUR 100 provided for in the Agreement for each day of delay in
payment by the Club, as from the relevant due dates specified in the Agreement until the
dates of their effective payment.
28. The Chamber also noted that, according to the Respondent, the contractual penalty of the
Agreement was excessive, abusive and disproportionate in accordance with the
jurisprudence of FIFA and the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).
29. In this context, the Chamber determined that the validity of the contractual penalty of the
Agreement had to be assessed.
30. The Chamber first held that penalty clauses may be freely entered into by the contractual
parties and may be considered acceptable if the pertinent written clause meets certain
criteria such as proportionality and reasonableness based on the circumstances of the
case.
31. In the present matter, the Chamber recalled the following wording of the contractual
penalty inserted in article 2 of the Agreement:
“[…] The contracting parties agree that the Club will pay the player an additional amount of EUR
100.00 for each day of delay in the agreed installments [sic] from the previous paragraph, if the
installment [sic] delay exceeds a period of 15 (fifteen) days. […]”
32. After analysing the content of the aforementioned clause, the Chamber highlighted that
whenever the payment of a contractual penalty is triggered in connection with a default of
payment that persist in time (i.e., it is not only paid once but increases over time with the
non-payment), these obligations tend to be considered as hidden interest rates rather than
penalties – and are to be limited to a rate of 18% per annum.
pg. 7
REF. FPSD-17639
33. While applying the above to the present matter, the Chamber considered that a so-called
contractual penalty of EUR 100 for each day of delay is in fact a hidden interest rate, which
on a yearly basis would correspond to an equivalent interest rate of 196% of the
outstanding amount. In line with the well-established jurisprudence of the Football
Tribunal, the Chamber considered the percentage unreasonable and disproportionate.
34. In view of the foregoing, the Chamber concluded that article 2 of the Agreement cannot be
enforced, despite having been contractually agreed, and that it should be reduced to the
maximum interest rate permitted by the jurisprudence of the Football Tribunal, i.e. 18%
p.a. as from the respective due dates of each instalment until the date of effective payment.
35. Consequently, taking into consideration the Claimant’s request, the actual payment dates
by the Club in relation to those specified in the Agreement, as well as the wording of article
2 of the Agreement, which stipulates that the so-called contractual penalty applies from
the 16th day following the due date of each instalment, the Chamber awarded the Claimant
the following:
• 18% interest p.a. over the amount of EUR 3,218 as from 16 June 2024 until 5 July
2024;
• 18% interest p.a. over the amount of EUR 6,218 as from 17 July 2024 until 6
September 2024;
• 18% interest p.a. over the amount of EUR 3,000 as from 7 September 2024 until 10
October 2024;
• 18% interest p.a. over the amount of EUR 6,218 as from 31 August 2024 until 10
October 2024;
• 18% interest p.a. over the amount of EUR 6,000 as from 11 October 2024 until 24
December 2024.
ii. Art. 12bis of the Regulations
36. 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.
37. To this end, the Chamber highlighted that, while it is true that, based on the evidence on
file, the Player did not send any notice of default to the Club, this does not imply that the
Club does not owe the Player a debt. The Single Judge clarified that, in the absence of a
notice of default, the requirements of art. 12bis of the Regulations were not fulfilled and,
therefore, the Club could not be sanctioned based on that article. However, the Club shall
bear the consequences stipulated in the Agreement, in accordance with the general legal
principle of pacta sunt servanda.
pg. 8
REF. FPSD-17639
iii. Compliance with monetary decisions
38. 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.
39. 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.
40. 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.
41. 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.
42. 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
43. 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.
44. 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.
45. Lastly, the DRC concluded its deliberations by rejecting any other requests for relief made
by any of the parties.
pg. 9
REF. FPSD-17639
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Amer Hiros, is partially accepted.
2.
The Respondent, HNK Sibenik, must pay to the Claimant the following amounts:
-
18% interest p.a. over the amount of EUR 3,218 as from 16 June 2024 until 5 July
2024;
18% interest p.a. over the amount of EUR 6,218 as from 17 July 2024 until 6
September 2024;
18% interest p.a. over the amount of EUR 3,000 as from 7 September 2024 until 10
October 2024;
18% interest p.a. over the amount of EUR 6,218 as from 31 August 2024 until 10
Octboer 2024;
18% interest p.a. over the amount of EUR 6,000 as from 11 October 2024 until 24
December 2024.
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. 10
REF. FPSD-17639
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. 11