Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF. FPSD-17413
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 27 February 2025
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the player
Adrien Daniel Karoly Regattin
COMPOSITION:
Frans DE WEGER (The Netherlands), Chairperson
Andre DOS SANTOS MEGALE (Brazil), Member
Stefano SARTORI (Italy), Member
CLAIMANT:
Adrien Daniel Karoly Regattin, France
Represented by Riza Koklu
RESPONDENT:
Ikas Eyupspor, Türkiye
Represented by Ercan Sevdimbaş
pg. 2
REF. FPSD-17413
I. Facts of the case
1.
On 17 July 2023, the French player Adrien Daniel Karoly Regattin (hereinafter: the Claimant
or the Player) and the Turkish club Ikas Eyupspor (hereinafter: the Respondent or the Club)
concluded an employment contract (hereinafter: the Contract) valid as from its date of
signature until 30 June 2024.
2.
On 31 May 2024, the Claimant and the Respondent concluded an agreement to settle
unpaid remuneration and terminate their employment relationship (hereinafter: the
Settlement Agreement).
3.
The Settlement Agreement read as follows:
“[…] 1.1 The parties hereby immediately terminate by mutual agreement all
relationships and disputes which may exist between them up to the date hereof for
whatever concept and expressly declare not to have any claims whatsoever against
the other because of the ending of the Professional Football Player Contract with the
starting date of 17.07.2023 and ending date of 30.06.2024, Protocol and its annexes.
1.2 The parties have agreed that the Player has a total unpaid receivable of Net
389.680.-EUR (four months salary and bonus for promotion to the super league) from
the Club in relation to the receivables arising from the Player's Professional Footballer
Contract, Employment Contract and its annexes with a start date of 17.07.2023 and
end date of 30.06.2024. 389.680.-EUR shall be paid to the Player by the Club by three
installment on following dates;
Net 89.680,-Euro on 05.06.2024,
Net 150.000-Euro on 26.08.2024,
Net 150.000,-Euro on 02.01.2025.
If the first installment dated 05.06.2024 is not paid on time, this protocol will be
automatically unvalidated. Also, if the first installment dated June 5 is paid on time
and the Protocol continues, if the second installment dated 26.08.2024 is not paid on
time, the third installment dated 02.01.2025 will immediately become due and
demandable.
1.3. In this context; the Player accepts and undertakes to release the Club irrevocably for all the
obligations set in the Contract and also the other agreements, arrangements and understandings
made by and between the parties regarding the same period and for any other claims /
compensation related to employment contract(s) except for the receivables specified in article 1.2 of
this agreement. The parties accept, undertake and declare that the football player's rights regarding
the tax clauses in the contracts are reserved and that the tax-related clauses in question continue to
be valid. […]”
pg. 3
REF. FPSD-17413
II. Proceedings before FIFA
4.
On 10 December 2024, the Claimant filed the claim at hand before FIFA. A summary of the
parties’ position is detailed below.
a. Position of the Claimant
5.
According to the Claimant, the acceleration clause of the Settlement Agreement was
triggered when the Club failed to pay the full amount of the second instalment of the
Settlement Agreement by 26 August 2024. In fact, the Player noted that the Club had
partially paid the second instalment of the Settlement Agreement, i.e. EUR 100,000.
6.
Considering the foregoing, the Claimant requested EUR 200,000 net, plus 5% interest p.a.
as from 27 August 2024 until the date of effective payment.
b. Position of the Respondent
7.
According to the Respondent, it has fulfilled its financial obligations in accordance with the
Settlement Agreement. Therefore, it is the position of the Respondent that the Claimant’s
request for relief must be rejected.
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
8.
First of all, the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: the Chamber or the 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 10 December 2024 and submitted for decision
on 27 February 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.
9.
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 (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 French player and
a Turkish club.
10. 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 on the Status and Transfer of Players, the January 2025 edition of said
pg. 4
REF. FPSD-17413
regulations (hereinafter: the Regulations) is applicable to the matter at hand as to the
substance.
b. Burden of proof
11. 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 Transfer Matching System (TMS).
c. Merits of the dispute
12. 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.
i. Main legal discussion and considerations
13. The Chamber then moved to the substance of the matter, and took note of the fact that
the parties strongly dispute the payment of certain financial obligations by the Respondent
and the application of the acceleration clause as per the Settlement Agreement.
14. 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 latter had a valid justification for not
having complied with its financial obligations; and whether the acceleration clause was
triggered. In this regard, the Chamber first noted that in the case at hand the Respondent
bore the burden of proving that it indeed complied with the financial terms of the
Settlement Agreement concluded between the parties.
15. On one hand, the Chamber observed that, according to the Claimant, the Respondent
failed to remit in full the second instalment of the Settlement Agreement, which triggered
the acceleration clause pursuant to article 1.2 of the Settlement Agreement. In fact, the
Chamber acknowledged the position of the Claimant that he is entitled to EUR 200,000 net,
as the balance of the second and third instalments of the Settlement Agreement.
pg. 5
REF. FPSD-17413
16. On the other hand, the Chamber noted that the Respondent argued that it had fulfilled its
financial obligations in accordance with the Settlement Agreement. However, the Chamber
took note that the Respondent failed to provide any evidence in this regard.
17. Consequently, the Chamber concluded that the Respondent partially paid the second
instalment, failing to pay EUR 50,000.
18. After concluding the foregoing, the Chamber proceeded to assess the validity of the
acceleration clause.
19. In this respect, the Chamber wished to emphasize that – in principle and in accordance
with the jurisprudence of the Football Tribunal – the acceleration of subsequent payments
upon the non-payment of an amount previously due as principal is a practice traditionally
recognized and considered proportionate, insofar as it constitutes a security in benefit of
the creditor, since it encourages the debtor party to respect its financial obligations
towards the creditor party.
20. The above being said, the Chamber underscored that acceleration of subsequent
payments that were contractually due (even if originally foreseen as payable at a later
stage) cannot be considered as a financial penalty that can be moderated, but as an early
maturity of the principal amount due, which – in casu – is proportionate, in view of the lack
of payment in full of the second instalment of the Settlement Agreement and in light of
what was specifically agreed between the parties under article 1.2 of the Settlement
Agreement within their autonomy of the will (pacta sunt servanda).
21. Considering the foregoing, the Chamber concluded that the acceleration clause of the
Settlement Agreement is valid, binding on the parties and was triggered on 27 August 2024.
22. As a consequence, and in accordance with the general legal principle of pacta sunt servanda,
the Chamber decided that the Respondent is liable to pay the Claimant EUR 200,000 net
pursuant to the Settlement Agreement.
23. In addition, taking into consideration the Claimant’s request as well as the constant practice
of the Football Tribunal in this regard, the Chamber decided to award the Claimant interest
at the rate of 5% p.a. on EUR 200,000 net as from 27 August 2024 until the date of effective
payment.
ii. Compliance with monetary decisions
24. Finally, taking into account the applicable Regulations, the Chamber 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.
pg. 6
REF. FPSD-17413
25. In this regard, the DRC 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.
26. Therefore, bearing in mind the above, the DRC 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.
27. 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.
28. The DRC 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.
d. Costs
29. 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.
30. 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.
31. Lastly, the DRC concluded its deliberations by rejecting any other requests for relief made
by any of the parties.
pg. 7
REF. FPSD-17413
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Adrien Daniel Karoly Regattin, is accepted.
2.
The Respondent, Ikas Eyupspor, must pay to the Claimant the following amount:
- EUR 200,000 net as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 27 August
2024 until the date of effective payment.
3.
Any further claims of the Claimant are rejected.
4.
Full payment (including all applicable interest) shall be made to the bank account indicated
in the enclosed Bank Account Registration Form.
5.
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.
6.
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.
7.
This decision is rendered without costs.
For the Football Tribunal:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
pg. 8
REF. FPSD-17413
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. 9