Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF 20-00018
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
On 16 July 2020
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the player Glen Matondo Luamba
COMPOSITION:
Geoff Thom ps on (England), Chairman
Michele Colucci (Italy), member
Abu Nay eem S hohag (Banglades h), member
CLAIMANT:
GLEN MATONDO LUAMBA, FRANCE
Represented by Mr Jean-Jacques Bertrand
RESPONDENT:
VARZIM SC, PORTUGAL
Represented by Mr Rui Pedro Carvalho
Page 2 of 8
REF 20-00018
I. FACTS OF THE CASE
1.
On 24 June 2019, the French player, Glen Matondo Luamba (hereinafter: the player or the
Claimant) and the Portuguese club, Varzim SC (hereinafter: the club or the Respondent)
signed an employment contract (hereinafter: the contract) valid as from 1 July 2019 until 30
June 2021.
2.
In accordance with the contract, the player was entitled to the following remuneration:
For the season 2019/2020: a global remuneration of EUR 15,000 payable in 12
instalments, the first one payable on the 10 August, and the rest payable on the 10th of
the following month;
For the season 2020/2021: a global remuneration of EUR 15,000 payable in 12
instalments, the first one payable on the 10 August, and the rest payable on the 10th of
the following month.
3.
In accordance with art. 10 of the contract, if one of the party terminate the contract without just
cause, he/it will have to compensate the other party: in case of termination by the club, it will
have to pay the residual value of the contract minus eventual mitigation; in case of termination
by the player, he will have to compensate the club in the amount of EUR 500,000.
4.
According to the Claimant, he signed the employment contract, and participated in a friendly
match on 6 July 2019, and his signature was announced on the club’s website.
5.
On 13 July 2019, the Respondent wrote a document (hereinafter: the letter) in accordance with
which it declared that the player “was not employed” in the club.
6.
According to the player, following the letter of the club, he sent a default notice to the club on
5 August 2019 arguing that the club had unilaterally and without just cause terminated the
contract signed on 24 June 2019, and requesting as compensation the residual value of the
contract to be paid before 19 August 2019.
7.
On 27 December 2019, the player lodged a claim against the club requesting the total amount
of EUR 34,000 corresponding to the total value of the contract, EUR 30,000 and EUR 4,000
as legal costs.
8.
In reply to the claim of the player, the club acknowledged that the parties had signed an
employment contract and that the player had been involved in the preseason.
9.
However, the club rejected the player’s claim in regards to the other statements, in particular,
the club deemed that after the friendly match during the preseason, the player allegedly
informed the club that “he wasn’t adapting to Portugal, that he didn’t want to stay away from
his country after all, and that he intended to return there”.
Page 3 of 8
REF 20-00018
10. For that reason, the club deemed that the player signed a declaration (hereinafter: the
declaration) in which he gave up “the contractual link and that he intended to return to his
country”. In addition, “he instructed an intermediary to obtain the declaration from [the club]
dated July 13th 2019 stating that he could sign up for another club, because he needed that to
conclude the registration process”.
11. The declaration provided the following: “I [the player] declare that I give up the contractual
relationship assumed [with the club] on 24 June 2019, intending to return to my contract to
arrange placement and continue to perform my activity there.
In that sense, I intend that there is no execution of the contract, nor that its registration is
promoted and that a declaration be issued recognizing that I am a free player to assume any
sporting relationship for the 2019/2020 and following seasons.”
12. Consequently, the club argued that it did not breach the contract and that in contrary, it acted
“in the interest of the player”.
13. On the declaration, the player stressed that he did not sign it. He argued that the declaration
was drafted in Portuguese and that he does not speak any Portuguese. Moreover, the player
argued that the signature on the declaration is not the same as his real signature.
14. After being requested by the FIFA administration, the player informed FIFA that he plays for
the French club, AF Bobigny, but that he is not bound by a contract.
II. CONSIDERATIONS OF THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION CHAMBER
15. First of all, the DRC analysed whether it was competent to deal with the case at hand. In this
respect, the Chamber took note that the present matter was first submitted to FIFA on 12
December 2019. Consequently, the 2019 edition of the Rules Governing the Procedures of
the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: the
Procedural Rules) is applicable to the matter at hand (cf. art. 21 of the 2019 edition of the
Procedural Rules).
16. Subsequently, the members of the Chamber referred to art. 3 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules
and confirmed that in accordance with art. 24 par. 1 in combination with art. 22 lit. b) of the
Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (edition June 2020), the Dispute Resolution
Chamber is competent to deal with the matter at stake, which concerns an employmentrelated dispute with an international dimension between a French player and a Portuguese
club.
17. Furthermore, 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 (editions 2020), and considering
Page 4 of 8
REF 20-00018
that the present claim was lodged on 12 December 2019, the October 2019 edition of said
regulations (hereinafter: Regulations) is applicable to the matter at hand as to the substance.
18. The competence of the Chamber and the applicable regulations having been established, the
Chamber entered into the substance of the matter. The members of the Chamber started by
acknowledging the facts of the case, as well as the documentation contained in the 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.
19. In this respect, the Chamber first acknowledged that the Claimant and the Respondent had
signed an employment contract on 24 June 2019 valid as from 1st July 2019 until 30 June
2021, according to which the Claimant was entitled to the total remuneration of EUR 30,000
payable in 24 monthly instalments.
20. In continuation, the Chamber observed that by a letter dated 13 July 2019, the Respondent
held that the Claimant and the Respondent were not tied by an employment contract.
Following this, the Chamber observed that the Claimant put the Respondent in default on 5
August 2019 requesting the residual value of the contract.
21. In continuation, the Chamber recalled that the Claimant lodged a claim in front of FIFA against
the Respondent requesting the total value of the contract arguing that it had been terminated
without just cause by the Respondent.
22. The DRC acknowledged that the Respondent recognized the existence of an employment
contract signed on 24 June 2019, but held that the Claimant had signed a declaration by which
it renounced to the execution of the employment contract and that as such nothing could be
claimed against the Respondent.
23. In this regard, the Chamber duly took note that the Claimant had denied signing said
declaration and held that the document was in Portuguese, a language he did not speak or
understand.
24. At this stage, the Chamber turned its attention on the declaration and the contents of it and
recalled the content of the declaration which establish that the Claimant “give[s] up the
contractual relationship”.
25. Following this, the members of the DRC found it important to emphasise that in accordance
with the legal principle of the burden of proof, which is a basic principle in every legal system,
a party deriving a right from an asserted fact has the obligation to prove the relevant fact (cf.
art. 12 par. 3 of the Procedural Rules). The Chamber noted that the Respondent, following a
request of the FIFA administration, had provided the original of the declaration.
26. Moreover, the DRC took into account the argumentation of the Claimant according to whom
the declaration was not signed by him and that the signature in the declaration was different
Page 5 of 8
REF 20-00018
from his official signature. The DRC further noted that the Claimant provided a copy of his
national identity card as a mean to demonstrate the difference in the signatures.
27. At this stage, the members of the DRC considered it appropriate to remark that, as a general
rule FIFA’s deciding bodies are not competent to decide upon matters of criminal law, such
as the ones of alleged falsified signature or document, and that such affairs falls into the
jurisdiction of the competent national criminal authority.
28. In continuation, the DRC recalled that all documentation remitted shall be considered with free
discretion and, therefore, focused its attention on the contract as it contained the signature of
the Claimant, provided by the parties in the context of the present dispute.
29. After a thorough analysis of the aforementioned documents, in particular, comparing the
relevant signatures of the Claimant, in the various documents provided in the present affair,
the members of the DRC had no other option but to conclude that, for a layman, the signatures
on the declaration appears to be similar to the one on the contract.
30. At this point, the Chamber found it relevant to highlight the fact that although, from a layman,
the signature of the declaration appears to be different from the one in the national identity
card of the Claimant, it is very similar to the one of the contract. The DRC noted that the
Claimant did not contest the signature in the contract at any stage.
31. Moreover, the Chamber further took note of the argumentation of the Claimant according to
whom, the declaration was in a language he did not understand and consequently could not
have signed such document.
32. In this regard, the Chamber found it important to highlight that as a principle, any person
signing a document of legal importance should only do so understanding and having duly
taken note of the content of said document. Consequently, and recalling that according to the
layman observation made by the DRC of the declaration, the declaration appears to have
been signed by the Claimant, he should only have signed that document with a full
understanding of it.
33. In view of the above, the Chamber deemed unanimously that the Respondent had submitted
sufficient documentation demonstrating the validity of the declaration and that the
argumentation of the Claimant in this regard could not be upheld.
34. Taken into account the content of the declaration, the Chamber was of the firm opinion that by
signing said declaration, the Claimant was not entitled to any amounts from the Respondent.
35. In the light of all of the above, the Dispute Resolution Chamber decided that it must reject the
claim put forward by the Claimant in its entirety.
Page 6 of 8
REF 20-00018
III. DECISION OF THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION CHAMBER
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Glen Matondo Luamba, is rejected.
For the Dispute Resolution Chamber:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
Page 7 of 8
REF 20-00018
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 8 of 8