Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF. FPSD-18222
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 15 April 2025
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the Player
Adam Maher
BY:
Calum Beattie (Scotland)
CLAIMANT:
Adam Maher, the Netherlands
Represented by Brantjes Advocaten
RESPONDENT:
Damac FC, Saudi Arabia
Represented by Mr Islam Hisham
pg. 2
REF. FPSD-18222
I. Facts of the case
1.
On 10 July 2022, the Dutch player, Adam Maher (hereinafter: the Player or the Claimant),
and the Saudi Arabian club, Damac FC (hereinafter: the Club or the Respondent) entered into
an employment contract (hereinafter: the Contract) valid as the date of signature until
9 July 2025.
2.
According to the Contract, the Respondent undertook to pay the Claimant a monthly salary
of USD 125,000 net.
3.
On 3 February 2025, the Claimant put the Respondent in default of payment and requested
the amount of USD 125,000 net to be remitted within 10 days.
II. Proceedings before FIFA
4.
On 14 February 2025, the Claimant filed the claim at hand before FIFA.
5.
On 5 March 2025, the FIFA Administration issued a proposal to the parties to settle the
dispute.
6.
On 20 March 2025, the Respondent requested a deadline extension of ten days on the
basis of “reduced working hours during Ramadan” and formally rejected the proposal.
7.
On 21 March 2025, the FIFA Administration granted the Respondent a deadline extension
until 31 March 2025.
8.
On 28 March 2025, the Respondent issued a letter, informing the FIFA Administration of
the following:
1. “Due to the reduced working hours during the ongoing month of Ramadan in our
region, where a typical workday is only half a day, we are facing challenges in our
ability to provide you with the necessary comments and documents by the specified
deadline.
2. Furthermore, the typical weekend in Egypt is Friday and Saturday
3. Additionally, the Egyptian Prime Minister has announced that 29 March, 30 March, 31
March, and 1 April are official Eid al-Fitr holidays, with a potential extension to
Wednesday, 2 April 2025, if Eid al-Fitr falls on Monday, 31 March 2025.
4. Given the high probability that Eid al-Fitr will fall on Monday, 31 March 2025, and the
holidays will be extended to Wednesday, 2 April 2025, and considering that the
weekend in Egypt falls on Friday and Saturday, the only working day in that
period would be Thursday.
pg. 3
REF. FPSD-18222
5. Furthermore, according to the Egyptian Labor Law No. 12 of 2003, when a workday
falls between two official holidays, it should also be considered a holiday.
6. Consequently, from Friday, 28 March 2025, until Saturday, 5 April 2025, will be
holidays, meaning the lawyers in our office will be unable to work on the
memorandum during this period.
a. Position of the Claimant
9.
In his claim, the player argued that the Respondent failed to pay the salary under the
Contract corresponding to the month of January 2025 – in the amount of USD 125,000 net.
10. The Claimant specified that, despite having put the Respondent in default, the latter failed
to comply with its financial obligations.
11. Consequently, the Claimant requested overdue payables of USD 125,000 net, plus interest
as from the respective due date.
b. Position of the Respondent
12. On 6 April 2025, the Respondent provided its reply to the claim.
13. On 7 April 2025, the FIFA Administration informed the parties that the admissibility of the
Respondent’s reply would be formally decided upon by the relevant deciding body.
pg. 4
REF. FPSD-18222
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
14. First of all, the Single Judge of the Dispute Resolution 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 14 February 2025 and submitted
for decision on 15 April 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. 1 in combination with art. 22 par. 1 lit. b) of the
Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (January 2025 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 an Dutch player and
a Saudi Arabian club.
16. Subsequently, the Single 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 Players (January 2025 edition), and
considering that the present claim was lodged on 14 February 2025, the January 2025
edition of said regulations (hereinafter: the Regulations) is applicable to the matter at hand
as to the substance.
b. Admissibility of the Respondent’s reply to the claim
17. In respect of the admissibility of the Respondent’s submission, the Single Judge noted that
the Respondent provided adequate evidence that all days between 29 March 2025 and
2 April 2025 (inclusive) were holidays.
18. Thereafter, the Single Judge took note of the Respondent’s reasoning that “considering that
the weekend in Egypt falls on Friday and Saturday, the only working day in that period would be
Thursday. (…) according to Egyptian Labor Law No. 12 of 2003, when a workday falls between
two official holidays, it should also be considered a holiday.”
19. The Single Judge hereby noted that the Respondent failed to provide evidence that
Thursday, 3 April 2025 was an official holiday. In particular, though the Respondent alluded
to the “Egyptian Labour Law No. 12 of 2003”, neither a copy of the law itself, nor a specific
reference to the provision included therein which was relevant to the extension of a public
holiday was provided by the Respondent.
pg. 5
REF. FPSD-18222
20. In fact, the only evidence provided by the Respondent in this context, a link to a webpage
containing an official list of holidays in Egypt, stated that the holidays due to Eid Al-Fitr
would only be extended to 2 April 2025.
21. Consequently, the Single Judge established that, whereas the deadline to submit a reply to
the claim was set on 31 March 2025 by the FIFA Administration, and the dates between
29 March 2025 and 2 April 2025 constituted official holidays, in application of art. 11 par. 3
of the Procedural Rules, the Respondent’s position should have been submitted at the
latest on the next working day, namely 3 April 2025, based on the evidence on file.
22. Consequently, the Respondent’s submission dated 6 April 2025 was understood by the
Single Judge to have been filed outside the relevant time limit, and therefore deemed
inadmissible.
c. Burden of proof
23. 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).
d. Merits of the dispute
24. 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
25. The Single Judge then moved to the substance of the matter, and took note of the fact that
the basis of the present dispute concerned the payment of the salary for the month of
January 2025, in the amount of USD 125,000 net.
26. In this context, the Single Judge acknowledged that it its task was to determine whether the
amount indeed remained outstanding or not, and if so, what the consequences of such
non-payment may be.
pg. 6
REF. FPSD-18222
27. The Single Judge recalled that, pursuant to the principle of the burden of proof, a party that
alleges a certain fact, also must corroborate its veracity with adequate evidence.
28. In this sense, the Single Judge observed that the Respondent bore the burden of proving
that the payment in dispute had been made, contrary to the Claimant’s assertion that it
remained outstanding.
29. Notwithstanding, the Respondent failed to contest the non-payment in the case at hand.
30. Thus, the Single Judge concluded that the amount indeed remained outstanding.
31. Based thereupon, the Single Judge decided that the Respondent shall be held liable to pay
the Claimant the outstanding remuneration of USD 125,000 net, in accordance with the
general legal principle of pacta sunt servanda.
32. Lastly, the Respondent shall pay interest on the abovementioned amount at the annual
rate of 5% as from 1 February 2025 until the date of effective payment.
ii. Compliance with monetary decisions
33. Finally, 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.
34. 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
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.
35. 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.
36. 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.
pg. 7
REF. FPSD-18222
37. 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.
e. Costs
38. The Single Judge 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.
39. Likewise, and for the sake of completeness, the Single Judge recalled the contents of art.
25 par. 8 of the Procedural Rules and decided that no procedural compensation shall be
awarded in these proceedings.
40. Lastly, the Single Judge concluded its deliberations by rejecting any other requests for relief
made by any of the parties.
pg. 8
REF. FPSD-18222
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant is accepted.
2.
The Respondent, Damac FC, must pay to the Claimant USD 125,000 net as outstanding
remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 February 2025 until the date of effective
payment.
3.
Full payment (including all applicable interest) shall be made to the bank account indicated
in the enclosed Bank Account Registration Form.
4.
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.
5.
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.
6.
This decision is rendered without costs.
For the Football Tribunal:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
pg. 9
REF. FPSD-18222
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