DRC Overdue Payables
Texto da decisão
REF. FPSD-17901
Decision of the
Players’ Status Chamber
passed on 6 March 2025
regarding a contractual dispute concerning the player Dion Lopy
,
BY:
Castellar GUIMARAES NETO, Brazil
CLAIMANT:
Stade de Reims, France
RESPONDENT:
U.D Almeria SAD, Spain
Represented by 14 Sports Law
pg. 2
REF. FPSD-17901
I. Facts of the case
1.
On 4 August 2023, the French club, Stade de Reims (hereinafter: Stade de Reims or the
Claimant), and the Spanish club, U.D Almeria SAD (hereinafter: Almeria or the Respondent),
entered into a transfer agreement (hereinafter: the Transfer Agreement) regarding the
services of the player Dion Lopy (hereinafter: the Player).
2.
Pursuant to clause 2.2 of the Transfer Agreement, the Respondent undertook to pay the
Claimant, inter alia, the following conditional fee:
“Contingent Transfer Fees
2.2. In addition to the payments established under paragraph “2.1." above, and subject
to and in accordance with the terms set out hereunder, ALMERIA undertakes to pay to
STADE DE REIMS the following contingent payments (hereinafter the “Contingent Transfer
Fees"), that can reach up to a total and maximum amount of €3.075.000,00 (Three Million
and seventy-five thousand Euros).
[…]
2.2.4. When the PLAYER makes a Starting Appearance in 25 (twenty-five) official matches
for ALMERIA, ALMERIA shall pay STADE DE REIMS a total amount of €153.750,00 (One
Hundred Fifty-three Thousand seven hundred and fifty Euros)”.
3.
Clause 2.2 of the Transfer Agreement also provided, inter alia, as follows:
“2.2.11. For the avoidance of doubt, for the purposes of this Agreement, 'Starting
Appearance’ shall mean the Player entering the field of play for ALMERIA in a LaLiga EA
Sports match as a member of the starting eleven and playing in such match from kickoff.
Notwithstanding, ALMERIA accepts that the bonus provided for in Clause 2.2.4 above
shall become due and payable when the PLAYER enters the field of play for ALMERIA in
any official match as a member of the starting eleven and playing in such match from
kick-off.
[…]
2.2.13. The payment of any Contingent Transfer Fee established hereunder shall be made
by ALMERIA within 45 (forty-five) days after the end of the relevant sporting season in
which the conditions set forth for such Contingent Transfer Fee were duly verified. The
Parties further agree that if ALMERIA's total liability towards STADE DE REIMS as payment
of Contingent Transfer Fees exceeds a total of €1.025.000,00 (One Million and twenty-five
thousand Euros) in any given sporting season, the PARTIES shall, in good faith, negotiate
pg. 3
REF. FPSD-17901
terms for the payment of the amount of Contingent Transfer Fees that exceeds
€1.025.000,00 (One Million and twenty-five thousand Euros)(the Exceeding Contingent
Transfer Fee) in instalments, allowing ALMERIA to pay the Exceeding Contingent Transfer
Fee until the season subsequent to the one in which the condition was verified”.
4.
On 2 May 2024, the Claimant invoiced the Respondent for an amount of EUR 146,062.50,
corresponding to the contingent payment of EUR 153,700 pursuant to clause 2.2.4 of the
Transfer Agreement, less the 5% solidarity contribution.
5.
On 4 October 2024, the Claimant contacted the Respondent by email and referred to the
above invoice. The Claimant stated that the payment was due on 15 August 2024 and
requested that the funds be delivered as soon as possible.
6.
On 18 December 2024, the Claimant put the Respondent in default and demanded
payment of EUR 146,062.50 within 20 days.
II. Proceedings before FIFA
7.
On 22 January 2025, the Claimant filed the claim at hand before FIFA. A summary of the
parties’ position is detailed below.
a. Position of the Claimant
8.
The Claimant requested overdue payables in the amount of EUR 146,062.50, plus EUR
7,270.38 in interest.
9.
According to the Claimant, the contingent payment was due on 15 August 2024 and
remained unpaid despite the number of reminders sent to the Respondent.
10. The Claimant’s requests for relief were as follows, quoted verbatim:
“7. For all the reasons described above, we seek the following decisions:
i.
[The Respondent] is ordered to pay us the Contingent Transfer Fee after deduction
of the solidarity contribution, amounting to an overall total of €146,062.50 (one
hundred forty-six thousand sixty-two euros and fifty cents), plus interest which
amounts to €7,270.38 (seven thousand two hundred and seventy euros and thirtyeight cents);
ii.
[The Respondent] is ordered to pay the whole procedural costs”.
pg. 4
REF. FPSD-17901
b. Position of the Respondent
11. On 27 February 2025, the Respondent responded to the Claimant’s claim.
12. The Respondent confirmed the debt, its amount and its due date. However, the
Respondent disputed the Claimant’s calculation of interest and considered that it should
not exceed EUR 3,201.69.
13. The Respondent requested the following relief, quoted verbatim:
“In light of all of the above, [the Respondent] respectfully requests the Players’ Status
Chamber of the FIFA Football Tribunal to:
(i) Determine that the amount to be paid by the Respondent on account of the triggering
of Clause 2.2.4 of the Transfer Agreement are correct (i.e. EUR 146.062,50) except for the
calculation of the respective interests, which shall be correctly assessed at EUR 3.201,69
(Three Thousand Two Hundred and One Euros and Sixty-Nine Cents), i.e. following the
application of a standard default rate of 5% p.a., as of 15 August 2024 until 22 January
2025.
(ii) Determine that no procedural costs shall be borne by the Respondent”.
III. Considerations of the Players’ Status Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
14. First of all, the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Chamber (hereinafter: the Single Judge)
analysed whether he was competent to deal with the case at hand. In this respect, he took
note that the present matter was presented to FIFA on 22 January 2025 and submitted for
decision on 6 March 2025. Taking into account the wording of art. 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.
15. Furthermore, the Single Judge referred to art. 2 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules and observed
that in accordance with art. 23 par. 2 in combination with art. 22 par. 1 lit. g) of the
Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (hereinafter: the Regulations) (January
2025 edition), the Players’ Status Chamber is competent to deal with the matter at stake,
which concerns a dispute between two clubs belonging to different member associations
i.e., a French club and a Spanish club.
16. Subsequently, the Single Judge analysed which regulations should be applicable as to the
substance of the matter. In this respect, the Single Judge confirmed that, in accordance
pg. 5
REF. FPSD-17901
with its art. 29, the January 2025 edition of the Regulations is applicable to the matter at
hand as to the substance.
b. Burden of proof
17. 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 he 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
18. Having established the competence and the applicable regulations, 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 he will refer only to the facts, arguments and documentary evidence, which
he considered pertinent for assessing the matter at hand.
i. Main legal discussion and considerations
19. The Single Judge then moved to the substance of the matter, noting that it concerned a
claim by the Claimant against the Respondent for a contingent transfer fee in the amount
of EUR 146,062.50.
20. The Single Judge noted that the Respondent expressly acknowledged the debt and the dies
a quo of the interest. As a result, the only dispute between the parties concerned the final
amount of interest claimed: while the Claimant claimed EUR 7,270.38, the Respondent
argued that only EUR 3,201.69 were due.
21. Accordingly, the Single Judge first confirmed that the Claimant should be entitled to the
sum of EUR 146,062.50 as outstanding amount, based on the general legal principle of
pacta sunt servanda.
22. In continuation, the Single Judge moved on to analyse the claimed interest. In this regard,
and in the absence of a clear contractual basis justifying an interest rate higher than the
annual 5% accepted by the jurisprudence of the Football Tribunal as a default, the Single
Judge recognised that the Claimant’s calculation appeared to be excessive vis-à-vis the date
of default and the date of the claim.
pg. 6
REF. FPSD-17901
23. In light of the foregoing, the Single Judge decided to award the Claimant interest at a rate
of 5% p.a. on the outstanding amount, as from the day following the due date (i.e., 16
August 2024) until the date of the actual payment. However, as the Claimant also limited
its request for relief to a specific quantum (i.e., EUR 7,270.38), the Single Judge also
determined that the interest calculation should be limited to the amount claimed in order
to avoid ruling ultra petita.
24. The Single Judge therefore partially accepted the claim of the Claimant.
ii. Art. 12bis of the Regulations
25. Having established the above, the Single Judge 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.
26. To this end, the Single Judge confirmed that the Claimant put the Respondent in default of
payment of the amounts sought, which had fallen due for more than 30 days, and granted
the debtor with 10 days to cure such breach of contract.
27. Accordingly, the Single Judge also confirmed that the Respondent had delayed a due
payment without a prima facie contractual basis. It followed that the criteria enshrined in
art. 12bis of the Regulations were met in the case at hand.
28. The Single Judge further established that by virtue of art. 12bis par. 4 of the Regulations he
has competence to impose sanctions on the club. On account of the above and bearing in
mind that this is the first offense by the Respondent within the last two years, the Single
Judge decided to impose a warning in accordance with art. 12bis par. 4 lit. a) of the
Regulations.
29. In this connection, the Single Judge highlighted that a repeated offence will be considered
as an aggravating circumstance and lead to more severe penalty in accordance with art.
12bis par. 6 of the Regulations.
iii. Compliance with monetary decisions
30. 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.
31. 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
pg. 7
REF. FPSD-17901
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.
32. 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.
33. 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.
34. 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
35. Finally, the Single Judge referred to art. 25 par. 1 and 2 of the Procedural Rules, according
to which in disputes between clubs, costs in the maximum amount of USD 25,000 are
levied. As per art. 25 par. 5 of the Procedural Rules, the Single Judge will decide the amount
that each party is due to pay, in consideration of the parties’ degree of success and their
conduct during the procedure, as well as any advance of costs paid.
36. Considering that the claim of the Claimant has been almost entirely accepted (with the
exception of the slight amendment to the interest calculation), the Single Judge concluded
that the Respondent should bear the entirety of the costs of the current proceedings
before FIFA. According to Annexe 1 of the Procedural Rules, the costs of the proceedings
are to be levied on the basis of the amount in dispute.
37. In light of the above, the Single Judge determined the costs of the current proceedings to
the amount of USD 20,000 and concluded that said amount had to be paid by the
Respondent. Finally, the Single Judge determined that the advance of costs paid by the
Claimant at the start of the proceedings would be fully reimbursed in line with art. 25 par.
5 of the Procedural Rules.
38. In the end, the Single Judge rejected any other request for relief made by any of the parties.
pg. 8
REF. FPSD-17901
IV. Decision of the Players’ Status Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, STADE DE REIMS, is partially accepted.
2.
The Respondent, U.D Almeria SAD, must pay to the Claimant the following amount(s):
- EUR 146,062.50 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 16 August
2024 until the date of effective payment (but limited to EUR 7,270.38).
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. 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.
7.
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.
8.
The final costs of the proceedings in the amount of USD 20,000 are to be paid by the
Respondent to FIFA. FIFA will reimburse to the Claimant the advance of costs paid at the
start of the present proceedings (cf., note relating to the payment of the procedural costs
below).
For the Football Tribunal:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
pg. 9
REF. FPSD-17901
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. 10