DRC Overdue Payables
Texto da decisão
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) judge
passed on 1 October 2015,
by Philippe Diallo (France), DRC judge,
on the claim presented by the player,
Player A, country B
as Claimant
against the club,
Club C, country D
as Respondent
regarding an employment-related dispute
between the parties in connection with overdue payables
I.
Facts of the case
1.
On 20 January 2015, the player from country B, Player A (hereinafter: the
Claimant) and the club from country D, Club C (hereinafter: the Respondent)
signed an employment contract (hereinafter: the contract) valid as from 23
January 2015 until 30 June 2016, which was terminated on 1 July 2015.
2.
In accordance with the contract, the Respondent undertook to pay to the
Claimant a monthly salary of EUR 3,000. Furthermore, the contract provided that
the Claimant was entitled to EUR 500 “for every victory in every official game he
played as a titular” and to EUR 200 “per point won in an official game he played
as a titular, with equal result”.
3.
By correspondence dated 7 August 2015, the Claimant put the Respondent in
default of payment of EUR 16,000 setting a time limit of 10 days in order to
remedy the default.
4.
On 2 July 2015, and completed on 17 August 2015, the Claimant lodged a claim
against the Respondent in front of FIFA asking that the Respondent be ordered to
pay him overdue payables in the amount of EUR 16,000 corresponding to “four
months and 10 days” of outstanding salaries as well as outstanding match
bonuses for “4 wins and 5 draws”.
5.
In spite of having been invited to do so, the Respondent has not replied to the
claim.
II.
Considerations of the DRC judge
1.
First of all, the DRC judge analysed whether he was competent to deal with the
matter at hand. In this respect, he took note that the present matter was
submitted to FIFA on 2 July 2015. Consequently, the Rules Governing the
Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber
(edition 2015; hereinafter: Procedural Rules) are applicable to the matter at hand
(cf. art. 21 of the Procedural Rules).
2.
Subsequently, the DRC judge referred to art. 3 par. 2 and par. 3 of the Procedural
Rules and confirmed that in accordance with art. 24 par. 1 and par. 2 in
conjunction with art. 22 lit. b of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of
Players (edition 2015), he is competent to deal with the matter at stake, which
concerns an employment-related dispute with an international dimension
between a player from country B and a club from country D.
Player A, country B / Club C, country D
Page 2 of 6
3.
Furthermore, the DRC 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 par. 2 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players
(2015), and considering that the present claim was lodged on 2 July 2015, the
2015 edition of said regulations (hereinafter: Regulations) is applicable to the
matter at hand as to the substance.
4.
The competence of the DRC judge and the applicable regulations having been
established, the DRC judge entered into the substance of the matter. In this
respect, the DRC judge started by acknowledging all the above-mentioned facts as
well as the arguments and the documentation on file. However, the DRC judge
emphasised that in the following considerations he will refer only to the facts,
arguments and documentary evidence, which he considered pertinent for the
assessment of the matter at hand.
5.
Having said this, the DRC judge acknowledged that the Claimant and the
Respondent signed an employment contract valid as of 23 January 2015 until 30
June 2016, which was terminated on 1 July 2015 and in accordance with which the
Claimant was entitled to receive from the Respondent a monthly salary of EUR
3,000 as well as bonuses in the amount of EUR 500 “for every victory in every
official game he played as a titular” and of EUR 200 “per point won in an official
game he played as a titular, with equal result”.
6.
In continuation, the DRC judge took note that the Claimant lodged a claim
against the Respondent in front of FIFA, maintaining that the Respondent has
overdue payables towards him in the total amount of EUR 16,000 corresponding
to outstanding salaries and outstanding bonuses.
7.
In this context, the DRC judge took particular note of the fact that, on 7 August
2015, the Claimant put the Respondent in default of payment of the
aforementioned amounts, setting a time limit of 10 days in order to remedy the
default.
8.
Consequently, the DRC judge concluded that the Claimant had duly proceeded in
accordance with art. 12bis par. 3 of the Regulations, which stipulates that the
creditor (player or club) must have put the debtor club in default in writing and
have granted a deadline of at least ten days for the debtor club to comply with its
financial obligation(s).
Player A, country B / Club C, country D
Page 3 of 6
9.
Subsequently, the DRC judge took into account that the Respondent, for its part,
failed to present its response to the claim of the Claimant, in spite of having been
invited to do so. In this way, the DRC judge considered that the Respondent
renounced its right to defence and thus accepted the allegations of the Claimant.
10.
Furthermore, as a consequence of the aforementioned consideration, the DRC
judge concurred that in accordance with art. 9 par. 3 of the Procedural Rules he
shall take a decision upon the basis of the documents on file, in other words,
upon the statements and documents presented by the Claimant.
11.
Having said this, the DRC judge acknowledged that, in accordance with the
documentation provided by the Claimant, the Respondent was obliged to pay him
a monthly salary of EUR 3,000 as well as EUR 500 “for every victory in every
official game he played as a titular” and EUR 200 “per point won in an official
game he played as a titular, with equal result”.
12.
Taking into account the documentation presented by the Claimant in support of
his petition, the DRC judge concluded that the Claimant had substantiated his
claim pertaining to overdue payables with sufficient documentary evidence.
13.
On account of the aforementioned considerations, the DRC judge established that
the Respondent failed to remit the Claimant’s salaries in the amount of EUR
13,000 as well as match bonuses in the amount of EUR 3,000.
14.
In addition, the DRC judge established that the Respondent had delayed a due
payment for more than 30 days without a prima facie contractual basis.
15.
Consequently, the DRC judge decided that, in accordance with the general legal
principle of pacta sunt servanda, the Respondent is liable to pay to the Claimant
overdue payables in the total amount of EUR 16,000.
16.
At this stage, the DRC judge wished to highlight that, on 12 June 2015, the
Respondent had already been found by the DRC judge to have delayed a due
payment for more than 30 days without a prima facie contractual basis, as a result
of which a fine had been imposed on the Respondent.
17.
With the above-mentioned considerations in mind, the DRC judge established that
in virtue of art. 12bis par. 4 of the Regulations, he has competence to impose
sanctions on the Respondent. Moreover, the DRC judge referred to art. 12bis par.
6 of the Regulations, which establishes that a repeated offence will be considered
as an aggravating circumstance and lead to a more severe penalty.
Player A, country B / Club C, country D
Page 4 of 6
18.
In view of the foregoing and bearing in mind that the Respondent did not reply
to the claim of the Claimant as well as the consideration under number II./16.
above, the DRC judge decided to impose a more severe fine on the Respondent in
accordance with art. 12bis par. 4 lit. c) of the Regulations.
19.
Along these lines, taking into consideration the amount due of EUR 16,000 as well
as the aggravating circumstance of a repeated offence, the DRC judge regarded a
fine amounting to CHF 6,000 as appropriate and hence decided to impose said
fine on the Respondent.
*****
III.
Decision of the DRC judge
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Player A, is accepted.
2.
The Respondent, Club C, has to pay to the Claimant, within 30 days as from the
date of notification of this decision, overdue payables in the amount of EUR
16,000.
3.
In the event that the amount due to the Claimant is not paid by the Respondent
within the stated time limit, interest at the rate of 5% p.a. will fall due as of expiry
of the aforementioned time limit and the present matter shall be submitted, upon
request, to the FIFA Disciplinary Committee for consideration and a formal
decision.
4.
The Claimant is directed to inform the Respondent immediately and directly of
the account number to which the remittance is to be made and to notify the DRC
judge of every payment received.
5.
The Respondent is ordered to pay a fine in the amount of
CHF 6,000. The fine is to be paid within 30 days of notification of the present
decision to FIFA to the following bank account with reference to case nr.:
Player A, country B / Club C, country D
Page 5 of 6
UBS Zurich
Account number 366.677.01U (FIFA Players’ Status)
Clearing number 230
IBAN: CH27 0023 0230 3666 7701U
SWIFT: UBSWCHZH80A
*****
Note relating to the motivated decision (legal remedy):
According to article 67 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, a copy of which we enclose hereto. 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 DRC judge:
Markus Kattner
Acting Secretary General
Encl. CAS directives
Player A, country B / Club C, country D
Page 6 of 6