Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
Decis ion of the
Dis pute Res olution Cham ber
passed on 9 April 2020,
in the following composition:
Geoff Thom ps on (England), Chairman
Roy Verm eer (the Netherlands ), member
Daan de Jong (the Netherlands ), member
on the claim presented by the player,
Ham di Naguez, Tunisia
represented by Mr Anis Ben Mime
as Claimant / Counter-Respondent I
against the club,
El Zam alek, Egypt
represented by Mr Bernardo Palmeiro
as Respondent / Counter-Claimant
and the club,
FK S uduv a, Lithuania
as Counter-Respondent II
regarding an employment-related dispute between the parties
I.
Facts of the cas e
1.
On 27 January 2018, the Tunisian player, Hamdi Naguez (hereinafter: the
Claimant/Counter-Respondent I or the player) signed an employment contract
(hereinafter: the contract) with the Egyptian club, El Zamalek (hereinafter: the
Respondent/Counter-Claimant, or the club), valid as from “(…) the season of :
January 2017/2018” until “ (…) the end of the season : 2020/2021” (free translation
from French).
2.
Furthermore, according to clause 2 of the contact, “The parties fixed a total
remuneration amounting to USD 1,842,532 (…), divided as follows:
First season 2017/2018, (…) USD 197,372 payable in four installments as follows:
First payment of USD 49,343 (…) payable on 15/1/2018.
Second payment of USD 49,343 (…) payable on 15/3/2018.
Third payment of USD 49,343 (…) payable on 15/5/2018.
Fourth payment of USD 49,343 (…) payable on 15/6/2018.
Second season 2018/2019, (…) USD 516,128 payable in four installments as follows:
First payment of USD 129,032 (…) payable on 1/8/2018.
Second payment of USD 129,032 (…) payable on 15/1/2019.
Third payment of USD 129,032 (…) payable on 1/4/2019.
Fourth payment of USD 129,032 (…) payable on 1/7/2019.
Third season 2019/2020, (…) USD 548,384 payable in four installments as follows:
First payment of USD 137,096 (…) payable on 1/8/2019.
Second payment of USD 137,096 (…) payable on 15/1/2020.
Third payment of USD 137,096 (…) payable on 1/4/2020.
Fourth payment of USD 137,096 (…) payable on 1/7/2020.
Fourth season 2020/2021, (…) USD 580,648 payable in four installments as follows:
First payment of USD 145,162 (…) payable on 1/8/2020.
Second payment of USD 145,162 (…) payable on 15/1/2021.
Third payment of USD 145,162 (…) payable on 1/4/2021.
Fourth payment of USD 145,162 (…) payable on 1/7/2021.”
(free translation from French)
3.
In addition, in accordance with clause 5 of the contract, the “Annexe - additional
clauses” stipulated that :
“1) The remuneration for the first season will be paid in cash at the rate of 100%
when the contract is signed.
2) The player shall receive 50% as a deposit at the beginning of each season at the
ceremony of signing the contract with the club.
Player Hamdi Naguez, Tunisia / Club El Zamalek, Egypt / Club FK Suduva, Lithuania
Page 2 of 15
3) The player will be paid only 20,000 Egyptian pounds as a housing allowance at
the beginning of each month.
4) Payments will be made according to the exchange rate in force at the Central
Bank of Egypt on the day of the transaction.”
(Free translation from French)
4.
Moreover, in accordance with the “Declaration”, the parties allegedly agreed upon
the following :
“The club declares that the player [...] shall receive 50% of the contract value as a
deposit for each sports season. The remaining amount shall be divided equally over
10 months.
This declaration has been issued for information purposes only and is intended to
serve and be relied upon as of right without involving the liability of the club.”
(free translation from French)
5.
On 12 November 2019, the player sent the club a default notice by means of a letter
dated 11 November 2019, granting it 15 days to fulfil its obligations as to
outstanding remuneration amounting to USD 171,868, corresponding respectively
to the monthly salaries as of August until November 2019 and to part of the sign
on fee, payable in advance of each season.
6.
Following this, on 1 December 2019, the player unilaterally terminated the
contract.
7.
On 2 December 2019, the player lodged a claim against the clubin front of FIFA for
outstanding remuneration and breach of contract and requested the total payment
of USD 2,917,012, corresponding to :
i. USD 288,016 as outstanding remuneration
- USD 109,676 for the salaries of August to November 2019;
-
USD 62,192 as the remaining part of the advance payment due on 1 August
2019;
-
USD 116,148 as the remaining part of the salaries due for the season 2018/2019
: the Claimant argued that he should have received USD 516,148 but only
received USD 400,000.
ii. Compensation
- USD 1,128,996 as compensation for breach of contract corresponding to the
remaining value of the contract for the last two seasons.
Player Hamdi Naguez, Tunisia / Club El Zamalek, Egypt / Club FK Suduva, Lithuania
Page 3 of 15
iii. Moral damages
- USD 1,500,000 as moral damages, allegedly corresponding to the transfer value
of the player.
8.
The player further requested the imposition of sporting sanctions on the club.
9.
In his claim, the player deemed that the club had outstanding amounts towards
him for a total value of USD 171,868, corresponding to the monthly salaries of
August to November 2019, as well as part of the sign on fee, payable in advance of
each season.
10.
In addition, the player held that the club still owed him USD 116,148 as outstanding
dues from the 2018/2019 season.
11.
Consequently, having put the club in default on 12 November 2019 and having
granted it 15 days to fulfil its obligations, however to no avail, the player sustained
that he terminated the contract with just cause on 1 December 2019 in accordance
with art. 12bis and 14 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players.
12.
For its part and in reply to the claim, the club firstly held that no outstanding dues
were pending for the 2017/2018 and 2018/2019 season.
13.
In addition, the club sustained that it paid between August and September 2019
the amount of USD 122,137.80 out of the amounts due on 1 August 2019, i.e. USD
137,096. The remaining part represented therefore “an amount inferior to what
could be considered a monthly payment (calculated pro rata)”, i.e. USD 14,958.20.
In this respect, the club explained that in reply to the player’s aforementioned
default, he was allegedly told that all payments were up to date.
14.
Furthermore, the club considered the “Declaration” to be a forged document as
“(i) the document is not dated and (ii) it is allegedly signed by the “Financial
Director for Football”, a position that does hold the power to issue and/or sign
documents of that nature, in particular documents that can affect an employment
contract signed between a player and the Club.”. In this respect, the club affirmed
that the aforementioned document did not exist and that no other document than
the contract should be considered.
15.
As such, the club deemed that, at the date of termination, only USD 14,958.20 were
due, said amount equalling to half a salary on a monthly basis and, therefore, the
player terminated the contract without just cause according to FIFA’s Regulations.
Player Hamdi Naguez, Tunisia / Club El Zamalek, Egypt / Club FK Suduva, Lithuania
Page 4 of 15
16.
Consequently, the club rejected the claim in full and lodged a counterclaim against
the player and, eventually, against his new club deeming that it should be held
jointly and severally liable.
17.
In this respect, the club requested the following monies:
- USD 1,128,998 “as the remaining value of [the contract]”;
- USD 1,200,000 “as loss of future earnings”;
- USD 526,437.71 “regarding the specificity of sports”.
18.
In addition, the club requested the player to be sanctioned “with a restriction on
playing matches of at least four-month” and, likely, his new club to be “banned
from registering any new players, either nationally or internationally, for two
entire and consecutive registration periods”.
19.
In his comments on the counterclaim lodged by the club against him, the player
sustained that the “Declaration” deemed as not existent and/or forged by the club,
was actually authentic, duly signed by the parties, bore the club’s stamp and printed
on the club’s letterhead paper. In addition, the player sustained that only a copy of
said document had been remitted to him.
20.
Moreover, the player rejected the alleged proofs of payment provided by the club
deeming that said proofs were not signed by him and did not mention any bank
account reference. Finally, the player reiterated his initial claim as previously
provided.
21.
In reply to FIFA’s request, the player explained that on 19 February 2020, he signed
a contract with the Lithuanian club, FK Suduva (hereinafter: FK Suduva or CounterRespondent II), valid as from the date of signature until 30 November 2020,
according to which he was entitled to receive a monthly salary amounting to
EUR 6,705.
22.
In its position to the claim and counterclaim of the parties, FK Suduva held that it
was informed that the player was a free agent on 25 January 2020 without any
information on his possible conflict with his former club.
23.
In fact, FK Suduva stressed out that the ITC having been issued by the Egyptian FA,
it duly signed a contract with the player in February 2020.
Player Hamdi Naguez, Tunisia / Club El Zamalek, Egypt / Club FK Suduva, Lithuania
Page 5 of 15
II.
Cons iderations of the Dis pute Res olution Cham ber
1.
First of all, the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: DRC or Chamber) 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
2 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 Procedural Rules).
2.
Subsequently, the DRC referred to art. 3 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules and
confirmed that, in accordance with art. 24 par. 1 in conjunction with art. 22 lit. b)
of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (March 2020 edition)
(hereinafter: the Regulations), it is competent to decide on the present litigation,
which concerns an employment-related dispute with an international dimension
between a Tunisian player, an Egyptian club and a Lithuanian club as CounterRespondent II.
3.
Furthermore, the DRC analysed which edition of the Regulations should be
applicable as to the substance of the matter. In this respect, the Chamber confirmed
that, in accordance with art. 26 par. 1 and 2 of the Regulations (March 2020 edition)
and considering that the present matter was submitted to FIFA on 2 December
2019, the October 2019 edition of said Regulations is applicable to the present
matter as to the substance.
4.
The competence of the DRC and the applicable regulations having been
established, the Chamber entered into the substance of the matter. In doing so, it
started to acknowledge the facts of the case as well as the documents contained in
the file. However, the Chamber emphasized 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.
5.
In continuation, the Chamber took note that the player and the club concluded the
contract on 27 January 2018 which was valid as from the date of signature until the
end of the 2020/2021 sporting season.
6.
At this point, the Chamber recalled that in accordance with the contract, the player
was entitled, inter alia, to a total amount of USD 1,842,532, respectively composed
of USD 197,372 for the 2017/2018 season, USD 516,128 for the 2018/2019 season,
USD 548,384 for the 2019/2020 season and USD 580,648 for the 2020/2021 season,
all sums being payable in various installments as per the contract.
Player Hamdi Naguez, Tunisia / Club El Zamalek, Egypt / Club FK Suduva, Lithuania
Page 6 of 15
7.
In addition, the Chamber also recalled that pursuant to clause 5 of the contract, the
player was to receive : i) the remuneration of the first season in cash at the
contract’s signature, ii) 50% as a deposit at the start of each season when signing
the contract with the club, iii) 20,000 Egyptian pounds as housing allowance at the
beginning of each month, and, finally, that iv) the payments would be made
according to the exchange rate in force at the Central Bank of Egypt on the day of
the transaction.
8.
Finally, the Chamber recalled as well that, in accordance with the “Declaration”,
the parties allegedly agreed upon the payment of 50% of the contract value to the
player as a deposit for each sports season, the remaining amount being divided
equally over 10 months.
9.
In continuation, the Chamber noted that the player lodged a claim against the club
maintaining that he had terminated the employment contract with just cause on
2 December 2019, after previously having put the club in default on 12 November
2019, since the club allegedly failed to pay part of the player’s remuneration. In this
respect, the player submitted that, at the time he terminated the employment
contract, the club had failed to pay him USD 288,016 corresponding to his salaries
as from August until November 2019, part of the advance payment due on 1 August
2019 and the remaining part of the salaries due for the season 2018/2019.
Consequently, the player asked to be awarded his outstanding dues as well as the
payment of compensation for breach of the employment contract corresponding
to the residual value for the period of December 2019 until the end of the
2020/2021 season. Finally, the Chamber took also note of the player’s request to be
awarded moral damages.
10.
The club, for its part, sustained that it had no outstanding dues towards the player
for the 2017/2018 and 2018/2019 seasons. In addition, it held that it paid
USD 122,137.80 out of the amounts due on 1 August 2019 and provided alleged
payment evidence in support of this argument. Therefore, the Chamber took note
that the club deemed that only USD 14,958.20 should be paid to the player,
however, said amount being due only in January 2020 and which corresponded, in
its opinion, to less than a monthly salary calculated pro-rata.
11.
In continuation, the Chamber recalled that the club also considered the
“Declaration” to be a forged document and as such, that it should not be
considered in the present matter.
Player Hamdi Naguez, Tunisia / Club El Zamalek, Egypt / Club FK Suduva, Lithuania
Page 7 of 15
12.
As a consequence of the above, the Chamber underlined that the club lodged a
counterclaim against the player and, eventually his new club, sustaining that the
player terminated the contract without just cause and requested to be awarded the
total amount of USD 2,855,435.71 as compensation for breach of contract. In
addition, the DRC also took note that the club requested the appropriate sanctions
to be applied against the parties involved and considered to be in breach.
13.
In reply to the club’s counterclaim, the DRC took note that the player rejected it in
full and that he reiterated his initial requests. For its part, FK Suduva sustained that
it had registered the player in good faith, in accordance with the practice and the
applicable Regulations.
14.
In view of the foregoing and of the diverging opinions of the parties, the Dispute
Resolution Chamber was of the opinion that the issue at stake, considering the
claim and counterclaim lodged respectively by the parties against each other, was
to determine whether the employment contract had been unilaterally terminated
with or without just cause by the player on 1 December 2019, and which party was
responsible for the early termination of the contractual relationship in question.
The DRC also underlined that, subsequently, if it were found that the employment
contract was breached by one of the parties without just cause, it would be
necessary to determine the consequences for the party that caused the unjust
breach of the relevant employment contract.
15.
Reviewing the argumentations of both parties, the DRC took note that the player
considered that he had just cause to terminate the contract as, despite having put
the club in default, it failed to pay him outstanding remuneration for several
months, composed of four monthly salaries, part of an advance payment and the
remaining part of the remuneration due for the season 2018/2019.
16.
On the other hand, the DRC took note that the club considered that all payments
were up to date at the date of termination and in accordance with the only valid
document concluded between the parties, i.e. the contract, and, as such, that by
terminating the contract on 1 December 2019, the player had breached the
contract.
17.
In this respect, the Chamber firstly noted that, despite arguing that it had no
outstanding payments towards the player for the 2018/2019 season and considering
that the player claimed USD 116,148 as the remaining part of the salaries due for
said season, the club failed to provide evidence that it had effectively paid the
amount the player claimed to be still outstanding. As such, and referring to the
legal principle of the burden of proof contained in art. 12 par. 3 of the Procedural
Player Hamdi Naguez, Tunisia / Club El Zamalek, Egypt / Club FK Suduva, Lithuania
Page 8 of 15
Rules according to which any party claiming a right on the basis of an alleged fact
shall carry the burden of proof, the Chamber concluded that the club did not pay
said amount.
18.
Moreover, the Chamber further focused its attention on the payments due for the
2019/2020 season and took note of the evidence provided by the club, allegedly
referring to the payment of USD 122,137.80 out of the amounts due on 1 August
2019, i.e. USD 137,096. In this respect, the members of the DRC analysed the three
provided documents named “Permission to Cash Check” and amounting to the
total aforementioned sum. Though, the members of the DRC underlined that
despite said documents mentioning the Claimant’s name as beneficiary, it could
not be established from their analysis that they constituted proper payment
receipts nor bank confirmations that said amounts had been duly cashed by the
beneficiary, i.e. the player. In addition, the DRC recalled that, as disputed by the
Claimant himself, the aforementioned documents did not bear the Claimant’s
signature.
19.
In line with the above, the DRC considered that the club did not submit conclusive
evidence in support of the aforementioned alleged payment allegations.
Therefore, the members of the DRC referred to the aforementioned principle of
burden of proof and decided, on such basis, not to consider said evidence. As such,
the DRC concluded that the payment of the instalment of August 2019 did not
occur.
20.
Furthermore, the Chamber took note of the forgery allegations put forward by the
club in its reply to the claim as to the “Declaration”. In addition, the Chamber also
recalled the arguments raised by the player, supposedly confirming the authenticity
of the “Declaration”.
21.
Firstly, the DRC deemed 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 fall into
the jurisdiction of the competent national criminal authority. However, after
having duly exanimated the content of the “Declaration” as well as the content of
the contract, the members of the Chamber observed that despite the existence or
not and/or the forgery or not of the “Declaration”, it appeared that it’s content
was also contained in clause 5 of the contract, i.e. as to the advance payment. As
such, the members of the Chamber concluded that they did not have to enter
further into the examination of the possible forgery of the “Declaration”, its
content being already part of the contract, and consequently, the Chamber could
disregard said forgery allegations.
Player Hamdi Naguez, Tunisia / Club El Zamalek, Egypt / Club FK Suduva, Lithuania
Page 9 of 15
22.
Therefore, taking into account all the preceding considerations, the Chamber
stated that, having failed to pay the player USD 109,676 for the period as from
August to November 2019 even though it had been duly put in default, the club
had seriously neglected its contractual obligations towards the player. In addition,
the Chamber recalled that the amount of USD 116,148 as the remainder of the
2018/2019 season had remained unpaid on the date of termination, as well as the
remaining part of advance payment due on 1 August 2019. Therefore, the Chamber
concluded that the club was found to be in breach of the contract and that, in line
with the Chamber’s longstanding and well-established jurisprudence, the breach
was of such seriousness that the player had just cause to unilaterally terminate the
employment contract with the club on 1 December 2019.
23.
Consequently, the Chamber decided that the club is to be held liable for the early
termination of the contract with just cause by the player in accordance with art. 14
of the Regulations.
24.
As an immediate consequence of such, the Chamber concluded at this point that
the counterclaim lodged by the Respondent/Counter-Claimant against the player
and the Counter-Respondent II is rejected.
25.
In continuation, prior to establishing the consequences of the termination of the
contract with just cause by the player, the Chamber decided that the club must fulfil
its obligations as per the contract in accordance with the general legal principle of
“pacta sunt servanda”.
26.
On account of the aforementioned considerations, the DRC established that the
club is liable to pay to the player outstanding remuneration, in particular, as agreed
upon in the contract.
27.
In this respect, the DRC held that the club failed to pay the player USD 288,016,
corresponding to the monthly salaries of August, September, October and
November 2019, to the remaining part of the advance payment due on 1 August
2019 and to the remaining part of the salaries due for the season 2018/2019.
Consequently, the DRC concluded that, in accordance with the general legal
principle of “pacta sunt servanda”, the club is liable to pay the player the
aforementioned amount.
28.
Having established that the club is to be held liable for the early termination of the
employment contract with just cause by the player, the Chamber further decided
that, taking into consideration art. 17 par. 1 of the Regulations, the player is
Player Hamdi Naguez, Tunisia / Club El Zamalek, Egypt / Club FK Suduva, Lithuania
Page 10 of 15
entitled to receive from the club compensation for breach of contract in addition
to the aforementioned outstanding remuneration.
29.
In this context, the Chamber outlined that in accordance with said provision the
amount of compensation shall be calculated, in particular and unless otherwise
provided for in the contract at the basis of the dispute, with due consideration for
the law of the country concerned, the specificity of sport and further objective
criteria, including, in particular, the remuneration and other benefits due to the
player under the existing contract and/or the new contract, the time remaining on
the existing contract up to a maximum of five years, and depending on whether
the contractual breach falls within the protected period.
30.
In application of the relevant provision, the Chamber held that it first of all had to
clarify whether the pertinent employment contract contained any clause, by means
of which the parties had beforehand agreed upon a compensation payable by the
contractual parties in the event of breach of contract. In this regard, the Chamber
established that no such compensation clause was included in the contract at the
basis of the matter at stake.
31.
As a consequence, the members of the Chamber determined that the amount of
compensation payable by the club to the player had to be assessed in application
of the other parameters set out in art. 17 par. 1 of the Regulations. The Chamber
recalled that said provision provides for a non-exhaustive enumeration of criteria
to be taken into consideration when calculating the amount of compensation
payable. Therefore, other objective criteria may be taken into account at the
discretion of the deciding body.
32.
The members of the Chamber then turned their attention to the remuneration and
other benefits due to the player under the existing contract and/or the new
contract, which criterion was considered by the Chamber to be essential. The
members of the Chamber deemed it important to emphasise that the wording of
art. 17 par. 1 of the Regulations allows the Chamber to take into account both the
existing contract and the new contract in the calculation of the amount of
compensation.
33.
Bearing in mind the foregoing, the Chamber proceeded with the calculation of the
monies payable to the player under the terms of the employment contract as from
its termination and concluded that the player would have received USD 1,019,355
as remuneration had the employment relationship been executed until its regular
expiry date at the end of the 2020/2021 season. Consequently, the Chamber
concluded that the amount of USD 1,019,355 serve as the basis for the final
Player Hamdi Naguez, Tunisia / Club El Zamalek, Egypt / Club FK Suduva, Lithuania
Page 11 of 15
determination of the amount of compensation for breach of contract in the case at
hand.
34.
In continuation, the Chamber assessed as to whether the player has signed an
employment contract with another club during the relevant period of time, by
means of which he would have been able to reduce his loss of income. According
to the constant practice of the DRC, such remuneration under a new employment
contract(s) shall be taken into account in the calculation of the amount of
compensation for breach of contract in connection with the player’s general
obligation to mitigate his damages.
35.
In this context, the Chamber recalled that, after termination of the contract, the
player signed on 19 February 2020 an employment contract with the Lithuanian
club FK Suduva, valid as from the date of signature until 30 November 2020,
entitling him to a monthly salary of EUR 6,705.
36.
Consequently, the player was able to mitigate his damages by EUR 60,345, amount
which corresponded to approx. USD 64,500.
37.
Furthermore, the Chamber recalled that in accordance with art. 17 para. 1 (ii), the
player is entitled to an additional compensation of three monthly salaries. In this
respect, the Chamber observed that given that the total amount of compensation
would be higher than the residual value, the player is entitled to the residual value
of the contract as compensation for breach of contract, i.e. USD 1,019,355.
38.
Subsequently, the DRC analyzed the player’s request for moral damages and, based
on the principle of the burden of proof, it concluded that the player failed to
provide the required evidence in order to support his allegations. In addition, the
DRC further held that there was no contractual basis for such request. Consequently
the DRC deemed that such request could not be awarded.
39.
The Dispute Resolution Chamber concluded its deliberations in the present matter
by establishing that any further request filed by the player is rejected. Equally and
considering that the club was, overall, found to be in breach of contract, the
counterclaim of the club is rejected.
40.
Furthermore, taking into account the consideration under number II./3. above, the
Chamber referred to par. 1 and 2 of art. 24bis 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.
Player Hamdi Naguez, Tunisia / Club El Zamalek, Egypt / Club FK Suduva, Lithuania
Page 12 of 15
41.
In this regard, the Chamber pointed out 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 and for the maximum duration of three entire and consecutive
registration periods.
42.
Therefore, bearing in mind the above, the DRC decided that, in the event that the
Respondent/Counter-Claimant does not pay the amounts due to the
Claimant/Counter-Respondent I within 45 days as from the moment in which the
Claimant/Counter-Respondent I, following the notification of the present decision,
communicates the relevant bank details to the Respondent/Counter-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 effective on the Respondent/Counter-Claimant in accordance with art.
24bis par. 2 and 4 of the Regulations.
43.
Finally, the Chamber 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. 24bis par. 3 of the Regulations.
Player Hamdi Naguez, Tunisia / Club El Zamalek, Egypt / Club FK Suduva, Lithuania
Page 13 of 15
III. Decis ion of the Dis pute Res olution Cham ber
1.
The claim of the Claimant / Counter-Respondent I, Hamdi Naguez, is partially
accepted.
2.
The Respondent / Counter-Claimant, El Zamalek, has to pay to the Claimant /
Counter-Respondent I outstanding remuneration in the amount of USD 288,016.
3.
The Respondent / Counter-Claimant has to pay to the Claimant / CounterRespondent I compensation for breach of contract in the amount of USD 1,019,355.
4.
Any further claim lodged by the Claimant / Counter-Respondent I is rejected.
5.
The counter-claim of the Respondent / Counter-Claimant is rejected.
6.
The Claimant / Counter-Respondent I is directed to inform the Respondent /
Counter-Claimant, immediately and directly, preferably to the e-mail addresses as
indicated on the cover letter of the present decision, of the relevant bank account
to which the Respondent / Counter-Claimant must pay the amounts mentioned
under point 2 and 3 above.
7.
The Respondent / Counter-Claimant shall provide evidence of payment of the due
amounts in accordance with point 2 and 3 above to FIFA to the e-mail address
[email protected], duly translated, if need be, into one of the official FIFA languages
(English, French, German, Spanish).
8.
In the event that the amounts due in accordance with point 2 and 3 above are not
paid by the Respondent / Counter-Claimant w ithin 45 day s as from the
notification by the Claimant / Counter-Respondent I of the relevant bank details to
the Respondent / Counter-Claimant, the Respondent / Counter-Claimant shall be
banned from registering any new players, either nationally or internationally, up
until the due amounts plus interest are paid and for the maximum duration of three
entire and consecutive registration periods (cf. art. 24bis of the Regulations on the
Status and Transfer of Players).
9.
The ban mentioned in point 8 above will be lifted immediately and prior to its
complete serving, once the due amounts are paid.
Player Hamdi Naguez, Tunisia / Club El Zamalek, Egypt / Club FK Suduva, Lithuania
Page 14 of 15
10.
In the event that the aforementioned sums are still not paid by the end of the ban
of three entire and consecutive registration periods, the present matter shall be
submitted, upon request, to FIFA’s Disciplinary Committee for consideration and a
formal decision.
*****
Note related to the publication:
The FIFA administration may publish decisions issued by the Players’ Status Committee
or the DRC. Where such decisions contain confidential information, 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 Rules Governing the
Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber).
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). The statement of appeal must be sent to
the CAS directly within 21 days of receipt of notification of this decision and shall contain
all the elements in accordance with point 2 of the directives issued by the CAS. Within
another 10 days following the expiry of the time limit for filing the statement of appeal,
the appellant shall file a brief stating the facts and legal arguments giving rise to the
appeal with the CAS (cf. point 4 of the directives).
The full address and contact numbers of the CAS are the following:
Court of Arbitration for Sport
Avenue de Beaumont 2
1012 Lausanne
Switzerland
Tel: +41 21 613 50 00
Fax: +41 21 613 50 01
e-mail: [email protected]
www.tas-cas.org
For the Dispute Resolution Chamber:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
Player Hamdi Naguez, Tunisia / Club El Zamalek, Egypt / Club FK Suduva, Lithuania
Page 15 of 15