DRC Overdue Payables
Texto da decisão
REF FPSD-3108
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 16 December 2021
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the player Khaleem
Shaquille Hyland
BY:
Frans de Weger (Netherlands), Chairperson
Angela Collins (Australia), member
Daan de Jong (Netherlands), member
CLAIMANT:
Khaleem Shaquille Hyland, Trinidad and Tobago
Represented by Mr Paul A. Mohamed
RESPONDENT:
Al Batin FC, Saudi Arabia
Represented by Mr Nasr Eldin Azzin and Mr Charles Felix
Page 2
REF FPSD-3108
I.
Facts of the case
1.
On 13 September 2020, the Trinidadian player Khaleem Shaquille Hyland (hereinafter: the
player or Claimant) and the Saudi Arabian club Al Batin (hereinafter: the club or Respondent)
signed a contract, valid from 30 September 2020 until the end of the 2021/2022 season.
2.
Article 4 of the contract states that the player was entitled to a total amount of USD
2,100,000, divided into 2 contractual years as follows:
USD 1,100,000 for the 2020/2021 season as follows:
- USD 250,000 as advance payment;
- USD 850,000 payable in 12 months instalments at USD 70,833 per month.
USD 1,000,000 for the season 2021/2022 season as follows:
- USD 150,000 as advance payment;
- USD 850,000 divided into 12 monthly instalments at USD 70,833 per month.
- ‘secured housing’;
- a car;
- two air tickets per season for the player and his family from home country to Saudi Arabia.
3.
On 17 April 2021, the player sent a default notice to the club, requesting the payment of an
amount of USD 141,666 as outstanding salaries, for February and March 2021, granting it
15 days to comply with its contractual obligations.
4.
On 23 June 2021, the player sent a second default notice to the club, requesting the payment
of an amount of USD 212,499 as outstanding salaries and SAR 21,500 as bonuses, granting
it another 15 days to comply with its contractual obligations.
5.
On 27 June 2021, the player sent an email to the club expressing concerning that he had not
heard back from the club as to his default notices.
6.
On 1 July 2021, the player sent an email to the club, stating that he had received only one
month’s salary out of the 3 months owed, granting it another 15 days to comply with its
financial obligations.
7.
On 19 July 2021, the player sent a final default notice to the club, requesting the payment of
an amount of USD 141,666 (USD 70,833 per month) as outstanding salaries for April and
May 2021, the amount of SAR 125,000 as match bonus for the final game of 2020/2021
season and the amount of USD 150,000 as the advance payment for the 2021/2022 season.
In the same letter, the Player reserved his right to file a claim with FIFA.
Page 3
REF FPSD-3108
II. Proceedings before FIFA
8.
On 22 July 2021, 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
9.
In support of his claim, the player submits that the club was persistently late in making payments,
for example, the advance payment of USD 250,000 was paid in 3 instalments.
10. The player further adds that the club was given several opportunities to comply with its financial
obligations, to no avail.
11. During the pre-season of 2021/2022, the player adds that he advised the club that he was
returning from Gold Cup International duty to Saudi Arabia on 20 July 2021 and requested that
the housing to which he is entitled be ready on arrival and the car, to no avail.
12. The player adds that prior to his return to Saudi Arabia, he also requested the assistance of the
club to amend his Saudi ID Card as he had renewed his passport. The player also requested a
return ticket from Belgium to Saudi Arabia which he was entitled to under the contract.
According to the player, the club failed to help him on either count therefore the player paid his
own flight to return to Saudi.
13. Upon arrival to Saudi Arabia, the player submits that he persistently tried to contact the club
officials and report for pre-season training. On 22 July 2020, the first team squad left for preseason camp in Egypt whilst the player was ignored and therefore had to train alone in the gym.
The player recorded numerous videos of his daily reporting to the club to show his efforts to
comply with contractual requirements.
14. The player adds that he was eventually contacted and advised to train with the youth team,
whilst the first team were away as the club claimed he failed to turn up in time for Camp.
According to the player, this is not true and that “it illustrates a clear example of a senior player
being marginalized and frozen out by the club”. Furthermore, in June 2021, the club apparently
signed a player in the same position and therefore, it is clear that the club did no longer wanted
to make use of the player’s services.
15. On his return to Saudi Arabia, the player submits that he had to arrange hotel accommodation
as the club had vacated his belonging from his previous accommodation. Eventually, the club
responded and wanted to negotiate termination of contract however, it was made clear that
there would be no negotiation on settlement until all arrears had been paid. The player adds
that previously the club had made a verbal offer to settle in the sum of USD 100,000.
16. The player adds that he received correspondence from the club dated 10 August 2021, in which
it claims that the player had acted in bad faith, made several breaches of contract, and returned
to the club late, which was not the case. None of these allegations have apparently ever been
Page 4
REF FPSD-3108
detailed by the club in writing. Furthermore, according to the player, the letter contained offers
to from two clubs, one in a lower league in Saudi Arabia and another with a club in Kuwait
which clearly shows that the club no longer wants his services and are trying to force a move to
another club with no intention of honouring the contract with him.
17. In view of the above, the player submits that the club played its final game for the 2020/2021
season on 30 May 2021. Therefore, the player states that, as the season ended in accordance
with the contract and seeing as the club has only paid the amount of USD 745,766 for the
2020/2021 season, he is entitled to the amount of USD 354,234.
18. Additionally, the player adds that the advance fee of USD 150,000 for the 2021/2022 season is
also due by the club. What is more, the player also submits a proof of payment of the flight
ticket that he had to pay for in the amount of EUR 1,030.74.
19. The requests for relief of the Claimant, were the following:
•
•
•
•
To be awarded USD 354,262.10 as outstanding remuneration for the 2020/21 season,
plus 5% interest p.a. as of the due dates until the effective date of payment;
To be awarded USD 150,000 as advance payment for the 2021/2022 season;
To be awarded USD 15,000 as legal costs;
To impose sporting sanctions on the club.
b. Position of the Respondent
20.
The club, in its reply, submits that in compliance with the contract, the club paid a total amount
of SAR 2,796,868 (equal to USD 745,737.98).
21.
According to the club, it is clear that in respect to the 2020/2021 season, the player received
the advance payment amounting to USD 250,000 and 7 monthly salaries amounting, in total,
amounting to approximately USD 496,000.
22.
The club adds that the player never contested the payment of his salaries in SAR.
23.
The club further submits that after it released the player to participate with the national team
of Trinidad and Tobago, he did not return to the club on the agreed date and that as a result,
it communicated with the player via WhatsApp informing him that failing to return to the club
constitutes a breach of the contract.
24.
In response to the above, the player apparently sent a voice note to the club, stating that he
had decided to extend his stay for 4 more days to see his family and that he has no issue with
the late payment of salaries.
25.
The club adds that the player’s absence affected in a negative way the sporting performance
of the club in the Saudi Professional League as the squad was not able to cover his position in
the field and lost an important match against Al-Shabab Club.
Page 5
REF FPSD-3108
26.
Furthermore, the club adds that on 21 April 2021, and through WhatsApp messages, the
player was summoned to a disciplinary meeting with representatives of the and on 22 April
2021, an internal disciplinary hearing in regards to the player’s extended stay abroad took
place. Accordingly, a decision was supposed to be taken in this regard after the return of the
player from his second summoning by TTFA in July 2021 but was interrupted “due to the
player’s unilateral termination after his return” in his default notice dated 12 April 2021.
27.
The club adds that on receipt of the above letter, on 28 April 2021, it proceeded to make
payment in the amount of SAR 265,624 as requested by the player.
28.
According to the club, despite amicably settling all the amounts requested in the letter dated
17 April 2021, the player sent another letter, requesting the payment of SAR 125,000 as
bonuses with no contractual basis and requesting payment of 3 outstanding salaries when in
fact only one salary was outstanding.
29.
The club adds that the advance payment for the season 2021/2022 was set to be paid at the
start of the season, which started on 12 August 2021.
30.
According to the club, based on the sequence of events, it is clear that the player wanted to
make use of any pretext whether it is lawful or not in order to get out of his contractual
engagement with the club. This is proven by the fact that the player is asking for three months
salaries and received the payment of two monthly salaries, meaning that he tried to breach
the contract when only one-month salary was outstanding.
31.
The club submits that on 21 July 2021, the player terminated the contract without respecting
the 15-day deadline in his default notice. Additionally, the club states that the player alleged
that he had been kicked out of his accommodation with no proof of said allegation. According
to the club, the player is still staying in its accommodation, despite his illegal termination of
the contract, which shows the good faith is the club.
32.
After the alleged contract termination, the club submits that it tried to settle the matter with
the player by sending him two proposals from two clubs, which he rejected stating that he
would not accept any offers until the received his outstanding remunerations.
33.
The club adds that on 10 August 2021, it sent a letter to the player stating “we request from
you to inform us If you are interested or accept any of the received offers to you in order to
confirm to the interested clubs immediately your acceptance for their offers and put you in
direct contact with them, please we look for your confirmation within 48 hours to finalize this
matter with one of the clubs that you accept joining them (attached the offers of the clubs)”,
however to no avail.
34.
The club submits that it cannot logically understand why the player would refuse such offers,
knowing very well that the transfer window in major leagues has now come to an end and
Page 6
REF FPSD-3108
subsequently he will not be able to play, unless the player is intentionally trying to cause
prejudice to the Club despite being fully able to mitigate his damage with two possible options.
35.
The requests for relief of the Respondent, as amended, were the following:
- consider that the Player unjustly terminated his contract by not respecting article 14bis and
claiming untrue amounts without any legal or factual proof;
- if the FIFA DRC considers that the Player had just cause to terminate the contract, it shall
rule that neither party deserves compensation, or at least that any compensation due to
the Claimant shall be reduced according to his violation;
- alternatively, rule that the compensation due to the Player, if any, shall be mitigated.
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
36. First of all, the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter also referred to as 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 22 July 2021 and submitted for decision on
16 December 2021. Taking into account the wording of art. 34 of the October 2021 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.
37. Subsequently, the members of 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 lit. b) of the
Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (August 2021 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 Trinidadian player and a Saudi Arabian club.
38. 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 Player (August 2021 edition) and considering that the
present claim was lodged on 22 July 2021, the February 2021 edition of said regulations
(hereinafter: the Regulations) is applicable to the matter at hand as to the substance.
b. Burden of proof
39. 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).
Page 7
REF FPSD-3108
c. Merits of the dispute
40. Its competence and the applicable regulations having been established, 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 the assessment of the
matter at hand.
i. Main legal discussion and considerations
41. The foregoing having been established, the Chamber 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 contract, namely the remuneration the Claimant was entitled to
during the 2020/2021 season, as well as an advance payment due for the 2021/2022 season
and the costs for a flight ticket.
42. At this point, the Chamber deemed it important to remark that the Claimant, in his initial claim,
requested both outstanding remuneration and compensation for breach of contract, also requesting
FIFA to determine that the contract was terminated by the Respondent, but later amended his request
to outstanding remuneration only, explicitly dropping his request for compensation for breach of
contract.
43. As such, any argumentation related to an alleged termination of the contract falls outside the scope
this matter, also because the Panel was convinced that based on the documentation and elements
presented by the parties, it could not be concluded that the contract between the parties was
effectively terminated.
44. In view of the foregoing, the Chamber acknowledged that its task was to determine, based on
the evidence presented by the parties, whether the claimed amounts had in fact remained
unpaid by the Respondent and, if so, whether the latter had a valid justification for not having
complied with its financial obligations.
45. The Chamber first noted 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 between the parties.
46. Nonetheless, the Chamber noted that the evidence provided by the both parties, it remained
uncontested between them that the Claimant – during the season 2020/2021 - received an
amount of USD 745,737.98, whereas he was supposed to receive the total amount of USD
1,100,000.
47. Furthermore, the Respondent did not submit any documentary evidence on the basis of which
it could be concluded, beyond doubt, that the amounts claimed as outstanding by the Claimant
were effectively paid. Furthermore, no reasonable justification was presented by the Respondent
for not having complied with the terms of the contract.
Page 8
REF FPSD-3108
48. In view of the foregoing and bearing in mind the basic legal principle of pact sunt servanda,
which in essence means that agreements must be respected by the parties in good faith, the
Respondent is held liable to pay the Claimant the outstanding amounts deriving from the
contract concluded between the parties, namely the total amount of USD 504,262.02.
ii. Consequences
46. Having stated the above, the members of the Chamber turned their attention to the question of
the consequences of such unjustified breach of contract committed by the Respondent.
47. The Chamber observed that the financial obligations deemed as outstanding in the present case
correspond to four monthly payments of USD 70,833 for the period between February and May
2021, an amount of USD 70,930.02 for June 2021, as well as an amount of USD 150,000 as
outstanding advance payment for the season 2021/2022.
48. 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 claimed
as outstanding under the contract, in total USD 504,262.02 as detailed above.
49. 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 the respective due dates until the date of effective
payment.
50. What is more, the Chamber finally decided to award the Claimant the costs for the flight ticket
in the amount of EUR 1,030.74, as the Claimant was able to demonstrate that he was
contractually entitled to said reimbursement and he also submitted evidence of having occurred
said costs.
iii. Compliance with monetary decisions
47. Finally, taking into account the applicable Regulations, the Chamber referred to art. 24bis par.
1 and 2 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.
48. 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.
49. 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
Page 9
REF FPSD-3108
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. 24bis par. 2, 4, and 7 of the Regulations.
50. 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.
51. 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. 24bis par. 8 of
the Regulations.
d. Costs
52. 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.
53. 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.
54. Lastly, the DRC concluded its deliberations by rejecting any other requests for relief made by any
of the parties.
Page 10
REF FPSD-3108
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Khaleem Shaquille Hyland, is partially accepted.
2.
The Respondent, Al Batin FC, has to pay to the Claimant, the following amount:
- USD 504,262.02 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from the due dates
until the date of effective payment as follows:
• on the amount of USD 70,833 as of 2 March 2021;
• on the amount of USD 70,833 as of 2 April 2021;
• on the amount of USD 70,833 as of 2 May 2021;
• on the amount of USD 70,833 as of 2 June 2021;
• on the amount of USD 70,930.02 as 2 July 2021;
• on the amount of USD 150,000 as of 13 August 2021.
- EUR 1,030.74 as reimbursement for the flight ticket.
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. 24bis 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 the ban shall
be of 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. 24bis par. 7 and 8 and art. 24ter of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players.
8. This decision is rendered without costs.
For the Football Tribunal:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
Page 11
REF FPSD-3108
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).
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
Page 12