Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF. FPSD-18077
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 20 June 2025
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the Player Serigne
Cheikh Mbacke Madina Faye
COMPOSITION:
Frans DE WEGER (The Netherlands), Chairperson
Stefano SARTORI (Italy), Member
Andre DOS SANTOS MEGALE (Brazil), Member
CLAIMANT:
Serigne Cheikh Mbacke Madina Faye, Senegal
Represented by Yakub Kizilkaya
RESPONDENT:
FC Etar VT, Bulgaria
pg. 2
REF. FPSD-18077
I. Facts of the case
1.
On an unspecified date, the Senegalese player, Serigne Cheikh Mbacke Madina Faye
(hereinafter: the Player or the Claimant) and the Bulgarian club, FC Etar VT (hereinafter: the
Club or the Respondent), entered into an employment contract (hereinafter: the Contract)
valid as from 26 January 2024 to 15 June 2025.
2.
Clause 2 of the Contract read as follows (quoted verbatim):
“1. This contract is concluded for the period from 15/06/2025. It enters into force on
26/01/2024.
2. THE FOOTBALL PLAYER undertakes to start work on 02/01/2024.”
3.
In accordance with the Contract, the Respondent undertook to pay to the Claimant inter
alia a monthly net salary of EUR 1,500; payable by the 25th of “the month following the
month for which it is due”.
4.
On 25 November 2024, the Claimant issued a default notice to the Respondent requesting
EUR 15,000 corresponding to the outstanding remuneration as per the Contract; setting a
time limit on 15 days.
5.
On 20 December 2024, the Claimant sent a termination notice to the Respondent.
I.I. Information retrieved from the Transfer Matching System (TMS)
6.
Based on the information retrieved from TMS, the FIFA general secretariat was able to
identify that the Spanish Club, Alzira (hereinafter: Alzira), initiated a transfer request in TMS
seeking the transfer of the Player from the Club to them – however, in the end, the transfer
was not concluded. In this transfer request, a mutual termination was uploaded by Alzira,
and it was indicated that the Player and the Club concluded a termination agreement on
23 January 2025 (hereinafter: the Agreement).
7.
The Agreement was duly signed by the Player and the Club and read as follows:
“This agreement was signed, with which labor contract No 440 of 25.01.2024, as well as any
additional agreements between both sides, were terminated by mutual agreement from
24.01.2025.
The financial relations between the parties were settled in additional agreement from
08.01.2025.
The parties mutually agree that the present document constitutes and acts as a Proof of Last
Contract End Date (POLCED) as per the FIFA Regulations, for the processes on the FIFA TMS
Platform, and the National Regulations of the relevant Football Association.
The agreement is signed in three copies - one for the parties and one for the STC with the
BFU.”
pg. 3
REF. FPSD-18077
II. Proceedings before FIFA
8.
On 4 February 2025, the Claimant filed the claim at hand before FIFA. A summary of the
parties’ respective positions is detailed below.
a. Claim of the Claimant
9.
According to the Player, the Club failed to pay his salaries from February 2024 to November
2024 and, therefore, he had just cause to terminate the Contract.
10. The Player requested the following relief:
“i. Order that the Respondent has to pay the overdue and unpaid amount of 15,000 Euros
with its interest %5 per year from the due date of each payment which is given below:
Amount Payment Type Due Date
- 1,500 Euros February 2024 Salary 25th February 2024
- 1,500 Euros March 2024 Salary 25th March 2024
- 1,500 Euros April 2024 Salary 25th April 2024
- 1,500 Euros May 2024 Salary 25th May 2024
- 1,500 Euros June 2024 Salary 25th June 2024
- 1,500 Euros July 2024 Salary 25th July 2024
- 1,500 Euros August 2024 Salary 25th August 2024
- 1,500 Euros September 2024 Salary 25th September 2024
- 1,500 Euros October 2024 Salary 25th October 2024
- 1,500 Euros November 2024 Salary 25th November 2024
ii. Order that the respondent has to pay compensation amount of 10,500 Euros with its
interest %5 per year starting from the termination date (20th December 2024)
iii. Order that the respondent has to pay an additional compensation amount of 9,000 Euros
with its interest %5 per year starting from the termination date (20th December 2024).
iv. If and so far, the amounts as mentioned over will not be paid to the Player within the stated
time limit, Article 24 of RSTP and disciplinary sanctions will be imposed to the club.”
b. Reply of the Respondent
11. Despite being invited, the Respondent failed to provide its position to the claim.
pg. 4
REF. FPSD-18077
c. Additional comments from the Claimant
12. On 21 March 2025, the FIFA general secretariat closed the submission phase and requested
the Player to inform of his employment situation as from the alleged termination of the
contract.
13. On 22 March 2025, the Player informed the FIFA general secretariat that he has not
concluded a new employment contract since the termination.
14. After the closure of the submission phase, and based on the information retrieved from
TMS, the FIFA general secretariat found that the parties had concluded the Agreement. In
this regard, and for the sake of the good procedural order, on 8 April 2025, the FIFA general
secretariat shared the document with the parties and invited the Claimant to provide
comments exclusively on the Agreement and to provide a copy of the employment contract
with Alzira (if any), by no later than 13 April 2025.
15. The Claimant failed to provide a reply within the deadline provided.
16. On 22 April 2025, the Claimant provided an unsolicited correspondence.
17. On 4 June 2025, the FIFA general secretariat informed the parties that the correspondence
sent by the Claimant on 22 April 2025 was disregarded, in accordance art. 23 par. 1 of the
Procedural Rules Governing the Football Tribunal (hereinafter: the Procedural Rules), which
establishes that the parties may not supplement or amend their submissions or requests
for relief or produce new evidence after notification of the closure of the submission phase.
pg. 5
REF. FPSD-18077
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
18. First of all, the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: the Chamber or DRC) analysed
whether it was competent to deal with the case at hand. In this respect, it took note that
the present matter was presented to FIFA on 4 February 2025 and submitted for decision
on 20 June 2025. Taking into account the wording of arts. 31 and 34 of the January 2025
edition of the Procedural Rules, the aforementioned edition of the Procedural Rules is
applicable to the matter at hand.
19. Furthermore, the Chamber 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 (hereinafter: the Regulations) (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 a Senegalese player and a Bulgarian club.
20. Subsequently, 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. 29 of the
Regulations, the January 2025 edition of the Regulations is applicable to the matter at hand
as to the substance.
b. Burden of proof
21. The Chamber 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 Chamber stressed
the wording of art. 13 par. 4 of the Procedural Rules, pursuant to which it may consider
evidence not filed by the parties, including without limitation the evidence generated by or
within the TMS.
c. Merits of the dispute
22. Having established the competence and the applicable regulations, the Chamber entered
into the merits of the dispute. In this respect, the Chamber started by acknowledging all
the above-mentioned facts as well as the arguments and the documentation on 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
assessing the matter at hand.
pg. 6
REF. FPSD-18077
i. Main legal discussion and considerations
23. The Chamber then moved to the substance of the matter, noting that the Claimant filed a
claim requesting outstanding remuneration and compensation for breach of contract.
24. The Club, on the other hand, did not respond to the claim, entailing that the Chamber’s
decision must be made on the basis of the documentation on file, that is, the
argumentation and evidence filed by the Claimant in line with art. 14 par. 1 and 21, par. 1
of the Procedural Rules.
25. The Chamber further noted that the Player sent a default notice on 26 November 2024
requesting the payment of his salaries and on 20 December 2024 he sent a notice of
termination of the Contract. Following this date, the Chamber observed that it appears that
that the parties may have concluded the Agreement on 23 January 2025.
26. In this context, the Chamber acknowledged that the following is to be analysed:
•
Was the Contract terminated with just cause on 20 December 2024?
•
Is the Agreement valid, and does it supersede the termination of the Contract by the
Player?
•
What are the consequences?
Was the Contract terminated with just cause on 20 December 2024?
27. In this context, the Chamber acknowledged that its task was to determine, based on the
evidence presented by the parties, whether the claimed amounts had in fact remained
unpaid by the Respondent and, if so, whether the formal pre-requisites of art. 14bis of the
Regulations had in fact been fulfilled.
28. The Chamber then referred to the wording of art. 14bis par. 1 of the Regulations, in
accordance with which, if a club unlawfully fails to pay a player at least two monthly salaries
on their due dates, the Player will be deemed to have a just cause to terminate his contract,
provided that he has put the debtor club in default in writing and has granted a deadline
of at least 15 days for the debtor club to fully comply with its financial obligation(s).
29. The Chamber noted that the Claimant claims not having received his remuneration from
February 2024 to November 2024. Furthermore, the Chamber noted that the Claimant has
provided written evidence of having put the Respondent in default on 25 November 2024,
i.e. at least 15 days before unilaterally terminating the contract on 20 December 2024.
pg. 7
REF. FPSD-18077
30. The Chamber also noted that in the case at hand the Respondent bore the burden of
proving that it indeed complied with the financial terms of the contract concluded between
the parties. Nonetheless, no evidence was provided.
31. Thus, the Chamber concluded that the Claimant had a just cause to unilaterally terminate
the Contract, based on art. 14bis of the Regulations.
32. Therefore, the Chamber underscored that the Claimant is, in principle, entitled to the
salaries from February 2024 to December 2024 and compensation for breach of Contract.
However, the Chamber observed that following this termination, the Agreement was
signed, and therefore, the following point is to be analysed.
Is the Agreement valid, and does it supersede the termination of the Contract by the
Player?
33. In this respect, the Chamber observed that the Agreement was executed after the
termination of the Contract and bore the signatures of both the Player and the Club.
Furthermore, the Chamber noted that the Agreement referenced an additional agreement
dated 8 January 2025. However, the content of said additional agreement could not be
verified, as neither party submitted a copy, nor was one available in the TMS.
34. Notably, the Chamber observed that the Player failed to submit any comments regarding
the Agreement within the deadline set by the FIFA general secretariat. In light of these
considerations, and in the absence of any formal objection to the Agreement, the majority
of the Chamber concluded that the Agreement was validly executed and reflected the
mutual intention of the parties to terminate the Contract. Consequently, the majority of
the Chamber determined that the Agreement superseded the unilateral termination notice
previously issued by the Player.
What are the consequences?
35. The majority of the Chamber further noted that the Agreement explicitly states that all
financial obligations between the parties were settled through an additional agreement
dated 8 January 2025. However, in the absence of a copy of this additional agreement and
without any clarification from the Player regarding the amounts allegedly due under the
Agreement, the majority of the Chamber finds itself unable to assess the existence or
extent of any financial claims. Accordingly, any financial dispute purportedly resolved
through the additional agreement cannot be adjudicated within the scope of the present
proceedings.
36. In light of the foregoing, and considering all the above the majority of the Chamber decided
to reject the Player’ claim.
pg. 8
REF. FPSD-18077
d. Costs
37. The Chamber 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.
38. Likewise, and for the sake of completeness, the Chamber recalled the contents of art. 25
par. 8 of the Procedural Rules and decided that no procedural compensation shall be
awarded in these proceedings.
39. Lastly, the DRC concluded its deliberations by rejecting any other requests for relief made
by any of the parties.
pg. 9
REF. FPSD-18077
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Serigne Cheikh Mbacke Madina Faye, is rejected.
2.
This decision is rendered without costs.
For the Football Tribunal:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
pg. 10
REF. FPSD-18077
NOTE RELATED TO THE APPEAL PROCEDURE:
According to art. 50 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., art. 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. 11