Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed via videoconference, on 20 May 2020,
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the player Nader Matar
COMPOSITION:
Geoff Thom ps on (England), Chairman
Jérôm e Perlem uter (France), member
Angela Collins (Australia), member
CLAIMANT:
Nader Matar, Lebanon & Morocco
Represented by Mr Pedro Macierinha
RESPONDENT:
Nejmeh Sporting Club, Lebanon
REF 20-00277
I. FACTS OF THE CASE
1. On 1 June 2019, the Lebanese and Moroccan player, Nader Matar, (hereinafter: the Claimant or
player), and the Lebanese club, Nejmeh Sporting Club, (hereinafter: the Respondent or club)
concluded an employment contract valid as from the date of signature until 30 May 2022
(hereinafter: the contract), pursuant to which the Respondent undertook to pay the Claimant a
monthly salary of USD 5,000, a payment of USD 35,000 on a yearly basis, USD 1,000 per month
as house allowance and bonuses.
2. On 6 January 2020, the player put the club in default of payment of USD 13,000, corresponding
to the monthly salaries of October 2019 and December 2019 as well as the housing allowance for
the months October and December 2019.
3. On 27 January 2020, the player, via letter sent to the club, terminated the employment contract
due to the club’s non-fulfilment of its financial obligations.
4. On the same date, the club replied to the player’s default notice, alleging that it was entitled to
deduct amounts from the player’s salary due to his behaviour.
5. On 11 February 2020, the Claimant lodged a claim against the Respondent in front of FIFA for
outstanding remuneration and compensation for breach of contract, claiming the following:
a. “declare that the contract signed between the parties was terminated by the player with
just cause, caused by the club that has not paid the salary amounts in the due time;
b. Condemn the Respondent Club to recognize the request above mentioned a.;
c. Condemn the Respondent Club to pay to the Claimant Player the salary overdue of
October 2019 in the amount of 5 000 USD; the monthly salary of December 2019 in the
amount of 5 000 USD; the House allowance for October, November and December 2019
in the amount of 3 000 USD; in a Total of 13 000 USD, more interests;
d. To declare that the plyer has a right to compensation, according to article 17 of the
Regulations on the Status and Transfer of players of FIFA;
e. To condemn the Club to pay to the Player the compensation in the total amount of
212,000,00 USD, pursuant article 17 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of
Players of FIFA;
f. All according to the Contract signed by the parties, the FIFA Statutes and regulations,
taking into account all relevant arrangements, laws and/or collective bargaining
agreements that exist at national level, as well as the specificity of sport, under penalty
of imposition of disciplinary measures to the Respondent if the above obligation is not
observed.
6. On 26 February 2020, FIFA’s Administration informed the player that in addition to the Moroccan
nationality, he possess the Lebanese citizenship and that his claim was directed against a Lebanese
club. In addition, and referring to his apparent double nationality, FIFA noted that he signed the
relevant employment contract with reference to his Lebanese nationality and that according to the
Page 2 of 6
REF 20-00277
information available in the TMS he was registered with Nejmeh Sporting Club as a Lebanese
player. Therefore, FIFA would not be competent due to the lack of an international dimension.
7. The player however insisted on FIFA’s competence. In this regard, the player brought forward that
he also has the Moroccan nationality since birth and that due to his double nationality the
international dimension was given.
8. On 20 March 2020, FIFA requested the Lebanese Football Association to inform our service about
the nationality with which the player was registered with Nejmeh Sporting Club in the period as
from 1 June 2019 until today. In this respect, the Lebanese Football Association confirmed that
the player was registered as a Lebanese player with the Respondent.
9. In its reply to the claim, the club held that it had fulfilled its financial obligation towards the player.
The club, via email, invited the player to collect his October 2019 salary, which was deducted by
20% due to a warning dated 25 October 2019, and the housing allowance but to no avail. The
club assumed that the player aimed to let three months elapse without receiving his salaries with
the scope to claim the residual value of the contract.
10. On 2 December 2019, the club sent a letter to the player by means of which the latter was invited
to “visit the club”, and informed about his October salary deduction of 70% due to his
“misbehavior”.
11. On 20 January 2020, the club, via email, invited the player to collect his October and November
2019 monthly salaries at the Lebanese Football Association. However, the player only agreed to
receive his November 2019 monthly salary, but not the October ones since it was deducted.
12. Moreover, the club argued that based on art. 8 of the contract, which reads as follows: “The Player
is subjected to the penalties rules of the club, and by signing this contract, the player declares that
he has read the attached penalty rules of the club, understood it and accepted it and in case the
player failed to comply with any of the penalties rules of the club, the club management has the
right to terminate this contract immediately upon the player’s responsibility and without paying
any compensation.”, it had the right to impose said deductions.
13. The club further pointed out that, before the player unauthorized departure in January 2020, he
was invited to collect his December 2019 monthly salary. However, he only collected November
and refused to receive October 2019, because deducted, and December. Therefore, the club
sustained that it owes the player only the salary of December 2019.
14. Finally, the club maintained that the player received, since 1 June 2019 until he left the club in
January 2020, USD 51,200. The club added that it proved its intention to continue the employment
relationship with the player.
15. In conclusion, the club “rejects the whole case and rejects the compensation requested by the
player amounted USD 212,000 since Nejmeh Club has never refrained from paying its financial
obligations to the player Nader Matar and never had intentions to terminate his contract especially
Page 3 of 6
REF 20-00277
that Nader Matar is a distinguished and admired player by Nejmeh Club and its Fans and the club
is totally surprised by his attitude.”
II. CONSIDERATIONS OF THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION CHAMBER
1.
First of all, the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter also referred to as Chamber or DRC)
analysed whether it was competent to deal with the matter at stake. In this respect, the DRC took
note that the present matter was submitted to FIFA on 11 February 2020. Taking into account the
wording of art. 21 of the 2019 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.
2.
Subsequently, the DRC referred to art. 3 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules and confirmed that, in
accordance with art. 24 par. 1 and 2 in combination with art. 22 lit. b) of the Regulations on the
Status and Transfer of Players, the DRC is competent to deal with the matter at stake, which
concerns an employment–related dispute with an international dimension.
3.
In this respect, the DRC started by acknowledging all the above-mentioned facts as well as the
arguments and the documentation submitted by the parties. However, the DRC emphasised that
in the following considerations it will refer only to the facts, arguments and documentary
evidence, which he considered pertinent for the assessment of the matter at hand.
4.
In view of the above mentioned provisions, the Chamber was eager to emphasise that, in principle,
and without prejudice to the right of any player or club to seek redress before a civil court for
employment-related disputes, it falls under its competence to deal with international employmentrelated disputes between players and clubs, unless an independent arbitration tribunal has been
established at national level.
5.
The members of the Chamber then referred to the Introductory Provision of the Regulations on
the Status and Transfer of Players, according to which some principles outlined in the Regulations
are also binding at national level and each association is obliged to draw up its internal regulations.
The associations are within the framework of their autonomy, free to adapt their internal rules to
the necessity and the particularity of the country concerned. Therefore, the competence of FIFA
is restricted to international transfers and disputes.
6.
Furthermore, in the context of labour disputes, the Chamber underlined that, as a general rule,
the international dimension is represented by the fact that the player concerned is not a national
of the country of the association to which the relevant club is affiliated.
7.
However, when both parties have the same nationality, the dispute shall be considered as national
or internal, with the consequence that the rules and regulations of the association concerned shall
be applied to the matter and the deciding bodies in accordance with the relevant provisions are
to decide on the issue. If FIFA’s deciding body would deal with such internal matter, the internal
Page 4 of 6
REF 20-00277
competence of FIFA Members would be violated. These principles of delimitation between the
competence of FIFA and the competence of the associations are primordial for the reciprocal
recognition of the organisations and autonomy of FIFA and the member associations.
8.
Having said this, the Chamber turned its attention to the circumstances surrounding the double
citizenship of a player. The Chamber observed that more and more players with two or more
nationalities have appeared in the world of football and that FIFA and its deciding bodies are
confronted with an augmented number of cases, which concern double citizenship. In this respect,
the members of the Chamber emphasised that a player’s nationality is expressed by his passport(s)
or identification documents, but that in the framework of plural citizenship a player could, under
certain circumstances, possibly invoke a “sportive nationality”. The “sportive nationality”
generally is linked to the concrete situation of the registration of a player with a club affiliated to
the specific association domiciled in a country of which the player also is a national, in compliance
with the rules of registration and eligibility for a club of the association concerned.
9.
In such situations, both the club and the player may reap advantages of the “sportive nationality”.
For example, the player being registered as a “local player” does not charge any quota of foreign
players and would have no difficulty in obtaining a visa or work permit, if at all required.
Furthermore, any possible restriction on the number of foreign persons in the country would not
be applicable in such situation. Obviously, such circumstances are to the benefit of both the club
and the player.
10. In this context, the Chamber recalled the crucial fact that the player, who holds both the Lebanese
and the Moroccan nationality, was registered with the club as a Lebanese player and not as a
Moroccan player. However, the player brought forward the fact that he also has the Moroccan
nationality since birth, and that due to his double nationality the international dimension was
given. Therefore, he maintained that FIFA has the competence to decide the matter at stake. In
this respect, the Chamber noted that the player signed the relevant employment contract as
Lebanese, which is confirmed in the TMS and by the Lebanese Football Association.
11. On account of all of the above considerations, in particular of the fact that the player was
registered as a Lebanese player with the club, the case of the player in question comes under the
jurisdiction of the football association in the country concerned (i.e. Lebanon), as a result of which
FIFA cannot intervene due to a lack of jurisdiction over the matter.
12. The DRC concluded its deliberations in the present matter by establishing that Claimant’s claim
is inadmissible.
Page 5 of 6
REF 20-00277
III. DECISION OF THE DRC JUDGE
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Nader Matar, is inadmissible.
For the Dispute Resolution Chamber:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
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 6 of 6