Dispute Resolution Chamber
Texto da decisão
REF FPSD-1920
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) judge
passed on 21 April 2021
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the player Kang Soo-il
COMPOSITION:
Pavel Pivovarov (Russia), DRC Judge
CLAIMANT:
Kang Soo-il, Korea Republic
Represented by Menno Teunissen
RESPONDENT:
Trat FC, Thailand
Page 2
REF FPSD-1920
I.
FACTS OF THE CASE
1.
On 4 January 2020, the player and the club signed an employment contract, valid as from
15 January 2020 until the end of the 2020 football season.
2.
Based on the contract, the player was entitled to the following amounts:
- Sign-on fee: THB 250,000 net;
- Monthly salary: THB 250,000 net, payable on the 5th of the next month;
- House: THB 5,000 net per month;
- Car: THB 5,000 net per month;
- 2 roundtrip flight tickets (Thailand-Korea).
3.
On 1 June 2020, the club issued a letter by means of which it confirmed the following to
the player: ‘This is to confirm that the employment contract between Trat Football Club and
the player Mr. Soo Il Kang expired on 31 May 2020’.
4.
On 18 February 2021, the player send a letter to the club, requesting an amicable settlement
to the matter at hand as well as the payment of outstanding remuneration and
compensation for breach of contract, however to no avail.
5.
After having requested to do so, the player informed FIFA that after the unilateral
termination of the contract, he signed a new contract with the Korean club Ansan Greeners
FC, valid between 31 March 2021 and 31 December 2021, according to which he was
entitled to the total amount of KRW 20,000,000. For the overlapping period until 30 April
2021, this corresponds to KRW 2,500,000 (approximately THB 69,800).
II.
PROCEEDINGS BEFORE FIFA
6.
On 2 March 2021, the Claimant filed the claim at hand before FIFA. A brief summary of the
position of the parties is detailed in continuation.
a.
7.
The claim of the Claimant
On 2 March 2021, the player lodged a claim against the club before FIFA, requesting the
payment of the following amounts:
THB 1,130,000 as outstanding remuneration, plus 5% interest p.a. as from the due dates,
broken down as follows:
- The unpaid sign-on fee of THB 250,000;
- The outstanding salary for the months of January, February and March 2020 in the
total amount of THB 500,000;
- The outstanding salary for the months of April and May 2020 in the total amount of
THB 300,000;
Page 3
REF FPSD-1920
- The outstanding transport and housing compensation in the amount of THB 50,000,
corresponding to the period between January and May 2020;
- Flight tickets in the amount of THB 30,000.
THB 3,120,000 as compensation for breach of contract, plus 5% interest p.a. as from the
date of claim, broken down as follows:
- Residual value of the contract in the amount of THB 3,000,000 corresponding to the
period between June 2020 and June 2021 (“end of the season 31 May 2021”);
- Residual value of the transportation and housing compensation in the amount of
THB 12,000.
- THB 750,000 as additional compensation, corresponding to three monthly salaries.
Moreover, the player request that FIFA declares that potential compensation due to the
player shall be considered “net of taxes” and that the player should be provided with tax
certificates.
8.
In his claim, the player explains that in the period between January and March 2020, he
only received THB 250,000 (instead of the total amount of THB 750,000), as well as the in
the months of April and May 2020, he only received THB 200,000 (instead of THB 500,000).
Moreover, the club allegedly never paid him the sign-on fee of THB 250,000.
9.
Moreover, the player explains that in May 2020, he was forced to leave his apartment by
the club, and his belongings were put on the street.
10.
What is more, the player concludes that the termination of the contract by the club on 1
June 2020, was made without just cause.
b.
Position of the Respondent
11.
Despite having been invited to do so, the Respondent did not reply to the Claimant’s claim.
III.
CONSIDERATIONS OF THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION CHAMBER (DRC)
JUDGE
a.
12.
Competence and applicable legal framework
First of all, the Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) judge (hereinafter also referred to as DRC
judge) analysed whether he was competent to deal with the case at hand. In this respect,
it took note that the present matter was presented to FIFA on 2 March 2021 and submitted
for decision on 21 April 2021. Taking into account the wording of art. 21 of the 2021
edition of the Rules Governing the Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the
Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: the Procedural Rules), the aforementioned edition
of the Procedural Rules is applicable to the matter at hand.
Page 4
REF FPSD-1920
13.
Subsequently, the DRC judge referred to art. 3 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules and observed
that in accordance with art. 24 par. 1 in combination with art. 22 lit. a) and b) and art. 23
par. 2 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (edition February 2021), the
DRC judge is competent to deal with the matter at stake, which concerns an employmentrelated dispute with an international dimension between a South Korean player and a Thai
club.
14.
Subsequently, the DRC judge analysed which regulations should be applicable as to the
substance of the matter. In this respect, he confirmed that, in accordance with art. 26 par.
1 and 2 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Player (edition February 2021),
and considering that the present claim was lodged on 2 March 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
15.
The DRC judge recalled the basic principle of burden of proof, as stipulated in art. 12
par. 3 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 DRC judge stressed
the wording of art. 12 par. 4 of the Procedural Rules, pursuant to which he may consider
evidence not filed by the parties.
16.
In this respect, the DRC judge also recalled that in accordance with art. 6 par. 3 of Annexe
3 of the Regulations, FIFA’s judicial bodies may use, within the scope of proceedings
pertaining to the application of the Regulations, any documentation or evidence generated
or contained in TMS.
c.
17.
Merits of the dispute
The competence of the DRC judge and the applicable regulations having been established,
the DRC judge entered into the merits of the dispute. In this respect, the DRC judge started
by acknowledging all the above-mentioned facts as well as the arguments and the
documentation on file. However, the DRC judge emphasised that in the following
considerations he will refer only to the facts, arguments and documentary evidence, which
he considered pertinent for the assessment of the matter at hand.
i. Main legal discussion and considerations
18.
The foregoing having been established, the DRC judge moved to the substance of the
matter, and took note of the fact that the Claimant was of the opinion that the Respondent
had unilaterally terminated the contract without just cause on 1 June 2020, by sending a
letter in which it was confirmed that the contract between the parties had ended.
Page 5
REF FPSD-1920
19.
In this context, the DRC judge acknowledged that it was his task was to determine whether
or not the contract was indeed terminated on 1 June 2020, and if so, whether said
termination was made with or without just cause.
20.
In this respect, the DRC judge first of all wished to address that the duration of the contract
concluded between the parties appears to have been for the duration of one sporting
season. In view of the absence of any specification in the contract on the exact duration, as
well as in view of the absence of any agreement/proposal discussed between the parties
about a possible extension of the contract, the DRC judge was of the opinion that the
contract expired naturally on 31 May 2020.
21.
What is more, the DRC judge wished to point out that the Claimant only brought up the
fact that the contract was allegedly extended until 31 May 2021 more than 8 months after
the alleged termination of the contract by the Respondent.
22.
In conclusion, the DRC judge was of the opinion that the contract expired naturally on 31
May 2020, and that therefore, the letter of the Respondent had to be interpreted as a
confirmation of said circumstance.
23.
What is more, the DRC judge decided that, in accordance with the general legal principle
of pacta sunt servanda, the Respondent however had to fulfil its obligations as per the
contract concluded with the Claimant.
24.
In this respect, the DRC judge noted that the Claimant had claimed a total outstanding
amount of THB 1,130,000, which claim was not contested by the Respondent in view of its
lack of reply to the Claimant’s claim.
25.
Consequently, the DRC judge decided that the Respondent is to be held liable to pay the
outstanding amount of THB 1,100,000 to the Claimant, consisting of an outstanding signon fee of THB 250,000, the outstanding salaries for the period between January and May
2020 in the total amount of THB 800,000, as well as THB 50,000 as outstanding housing
and transportation allowance.
26.
With regards to the claimed interests, the DRC judge decided – in line with the wellestablished jurisprudence of the DRC in this respect as well as the contractual due dates that the Respondent had to pay default interest at a rate of 5% p.a. as from the respective
due dates.
27.
The DRC judge further decided that the request for reimbursement of the flight tickets
cannot be awarded, as no documentary evidence was provided by the Claimant in this
respect.
ii. Consequences
Page 6
REF FPSD-1920
28.
Having stated the above, the DRC judge turned his attention to the question of the
consequences of such outstanding remuneration.
iii. Compliance with monetary decisions
29.
Finally, taking into account the consideration under number 12., 13. and 14. above, the
DRC judge referred to par. 1 lit. and 2 of art. 24bis 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.
30.
In this regard, the DRC 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.
31.
Therefore, bearing in mind the above, the DRC 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. 24bis par. 2, 4, and 7 of the Regulations.
32.
The Respondent shall make full payment (including all applicable interest) to the bank
account provided by the Claimant in the Bank Registration Form, which is attached to the
present decision.
33.
The DRC 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. 24bis
par. 8 of the Regulations.
Page 7
REF FPSD-1920
IV.
DECISION OF THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION CHAMBER (DRC)
JUDGE
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Kang Soo-il, is accepted.
2.
The Respondent, Trat FC, has to pay to the Claimant, the following amounts:
- THB 250,000 as outstanding sign-on fee plus 5% interest p.a. as from 5 January 2020 until
the date of effective payment;
- THB 10,000 as outstanding housing and transportation allowance, plus 5% interest p.a. as
from 1 February 2020 until the date of effective payment;
- THB 10,000 as outstanding housing and transportation allowance, plus 5% interest p.a. as
from 1 March 2020 until the date of effective payment;
- THB 250,000 as outstanding remuneration, plus 5% interest p.a. as from 6 March 2020 until
the date of effective payment;
- THB 10,000 as outstanding housing and transportation allowance, plus 5% interest p.a. as
from 1 April 2020 until the date of effective payment;
- THB 250,000 as outstanding remuneration, plus 5% interest p.a. as from 6 April 2020 until
the date of effective payment;
- THB 10,000 as outstanding housing and transportation allowance, plus 5% interest p.a. as
from 1 May 2020 until the date of effective payment;
- THB 50,000 as outstanding remuneration, plus 5% interest p.a. as from 6 May 2020 until the
date of effective payment;
- THB 10,000 as outstanding housing and transportation allowance, plus 5% interest p.a. as
from 1 June 2020 until the date of effective payment;
- THB 250,000 as outstanding remuneration, plus 5% interest p.a. as from 6 June 2020 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 set out in the
enclosed Bank Account Registration Form.
5.
Pursuant to article 24bis of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players if full payment
(including all applicable interest) is not paid 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 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 paid by the end of
the of the three entire and consecutive registration periods.
Page 8
REF FPSD-1920
6.
The consequences shall only be enforced at the request of the Claimant in accordance
with article 24bis paragraphs 7 and 8 and article 24ter of the Regulations on the Status and
Transfer of Players.
7.
This decision is rendered without costs.
For the Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) judge:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
Page 9
REF FPSD-1920
NOTE RELATED TO THE APPEAL PROCEDURE:
According to article 58 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 20 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 10