Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF FPSD-7026
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 8 December 2022
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the player
JAIME SIAJ ROMERO
BY:
Lívia Silva Kägi (Brazil), Acting Deputy Chairperson
José Luis Andrade (Portugal), member
Michele Colucci (Italy), member
CLAIMANT/ COUNTER-RESPONDENT 1:
Jaime Siaj Romero, Spain
Represented by Asociación de Futbolistas Españoles
RESPONDENT/ COUNTER-CLAIMANT:
Ansar, Lebanon
Represented by Ralph Charbel
COUNTER-RESPONDENT 2:
Finn Harps FC, Ireland
Page 2
REF FPSD-7026
I. Facts of the case
1.
On 20 December 2021, the Spanish player Jaime Siaj Romero (hereinafter: the Player or
the Claimant/Counter-Respondent 1) and the Lebanese club Ansar (hereinafter: the Club or
the Respondent/Counter-Claimant) concluded two employment contracts, the first one valid
as from 1 January 2022 until 31 May 2022 (hereinafter: the first contract) and the second
one valid from 1 July 2022 until 31 May 2023 (hereinafter: the second contract).
2.
In accordance with clause 4 of the second contract, the Player was entitled to:
• USD 10,000 paid on 1 July 2022;
• USD 6,000 as monthly salary for 10 months between 1 August 2022 and 31 May
2023.
3.
In accordance with clause 4.2 of the second contract, “the Club shall provide an individual
furnished appartement in Beirut during the term of the contract”.
4.
In accordance with clause 4.3 of the second contract, “the Player shall be granted one round
trip tickets to his country (Spain - Beirut/Beirut-Spain), economy class one time per season
during the period of this contract”.
5.
On 29 June 2022, a “Player release” letter was provided by the Club to the Player. The
document indicated that (1) the contract expired on 31 May 2022, (2) the Player was
released and (3) the Player had no more obligations with the Club.
6.
On 6 July 2022, as per the official Instagram page of the Club, the first training of the
season started that week.
7.
On 20 July 2022, the Player sent a letter to the Club indicating that he was at the disposal
of the Club to start the pre-season 2022/2023, and requested when and where the preseason will take place. Additionally, the Player requested the Club to arrange the flight
tickets to travel to Lebanon. The Player requested the Club to provide with a reply within
5 days.
8.
On 27 July 2022, the Player sent a second correspondence, stating as follows:
“(…) taking into account your silence, we ask for a clear answer from your side within the next
5 days, sharing with the player the details of his urgent incorporation, to provide his flight ticket
and to confirm that the player is registered to play for the club in official matches in the
upcoming season. If you fail to respond this letter, we assume that you have no interest in
honoring the labour relationship which can be equaled to the termination of the contract
without just cause, reserving this party all the existent legal actions to defend his interest and
labour rights in accordance with the FIFA RSTP, and in concrete, with its article 14”.
9.
On 2 August 2022, the Club played a match for the 2022/2023 Lebanese Elite cup.
Page 3
REF FPSD-7026
10. On 3 August 2022, the Player sent a third correspondence to the Club, stating as follows:
“(…) taking into account your silence and lack of action, we ask, again, for a clear answer
from your side within the next 3 days, sharing with the player the details of his urgent
incorporation, to provide his flight ticket and to confirm that the player is registered to
play for the club in official matches in the upcoming season.
If you fail to respond this letter in the referred terms within the next 3 days, we are forced
to assume that you have no interest in honoring the labour relationship and that you
have decided the termination of the contract of Jaime Siaj Romero without just cause,
informing you that after that deadline this party reserves all the existent legal actions to
defend his interest and labour rights in accordance with the FIFA RSTP, and in concrete,
with its article 14, due to your way of acting”.
11. On 4 August 2022, the Club sent via the application WhatsApp, a voice message, indicating
that there was no contract.
12. On 8 August 2022, the Player sent a correspondence acknowledging that without any reply
of the Club, the Club terminated the second contract without just cause. The Player
further stated: “[t]hat is why, given the repeated, persistent and erratic behavior of your Club,
who after having been requested has not remedied the referred situation, the player has no
choice but to send this document because the termination of contract without just cause that
you have decided in the case of Jaime Siaj Romero, with date of effects August 8, 2022”.
13. On 10 August 2022, the Club sent via the application WhatsApp a booking reservation for
a flight from Madrid to Beirut.
14. On 10 August 2022, two voice messages via the application WhatsApp were sent from the
Manager of the Club to the Player, indicating that the Club will comply with the second
contract and requested the Player to provide with his reply regarding the flight ticket to
go to Lebanon.
15. On 11 August 2022, the Club sent a communication to the Player asking the Player to
come to Lebanon, the date of the ticket was on 15 August 2022.
16. On the same date, on 11 August 2022, the Player informed the Club that the contract was
terminated on 8 August 2022, and thus the Player was free to sign with another club.
17. On 17 August 2022, the Club sent a letter to the Player indicating that he did not arrive to
Lebanon and the Club “consider [the Player’s] absence a refusal by [the Player] to recognize
the contract signed between [the Player and the Club], and therefore [the Club] will consider
this contract to have been terminated at the player's own risk in all financial and administrative
respects, and we have the to take the necessary and legal measures against him”.
Page 4
REF FPSD-7026
18. On 24 August 2022, the Irish Club, Finn Harp FC (hereinafter: the new club), sent an offer
with an employment contract to the Player.
19. On 24 August 2022, the Player and the new club concluded a contract valid as from the
date of signature until 30 November 2022. The player is entitled to EUR 390 gross per
week.
20. As per information contained in the Transfer Matching System (TMS), the Lebanese
2022/2023 season started on 2 September 2022 and is to be ended on 30 April 2023.
II. Proceedings before FIFA
21. On 10 August 2022, the Player filed the claim at hand before FIFA. A brief summary of the
position of the parties is detailed in continuation.
a. Position of the Player
22. According to the Player, the Club terminated the contract without just cause on 8 August
2022, considering that the Club did not reply to any of the correspondences sent by the
Player requesting information about his contractual situation.
23. The Player indicated that he is entitled to the outstanding remuneration and
compensation for breach of contract under FIFA regulations.
24. The requests for relief of the Player were as follows:
- USD 12,048.39 net as outstanding salaries, plus 5% interest p.a. as from 8 August 2022,
broken down as follows:
•
USD 10,000 as July salary;
•
USD 1,549.39 as August salary (8 days); and
•
USD 500 housing allowance.
- USD 62,951.61 net as compensation, plus 5 % interest p.a. as from 8 August 2022,
broken down as follows:
•
USD 4,451.61 as August salary (23 days);
•
USD 54,000 salary between August 2022 to May 2023; and
•
USD 4,500 housing allowance between August 2022 to May 2023.
-
To apply sporting sanctions on the Club.
b. Position of the Club and counterclaim
25. The Club indicated that:
Page 5
REF FPSD-7026
- The Player’s release was sent to him by the newly appointed Club Manager. Mr. Bilal
Farraj, who only knew about the first contract.
- “The Club manager acted in good faith as the player release concerned only the first contract
that ends on the 31st of May 2022. Then, after the Club Manager knew about the presence
of a second signed contract between the claimant and the respondent valid from the 1st of
July 2022 until the 31st of May 2023, he immediately showed his will to respect this contract”.
- The game of the Elite Cup is an unofficial tournament. The Lebanese Football league
started on 2 September 2022.
- The Club reached out the Player on 10 August 2022, in order to start the Lebanese
season.
- The Club terminated the contract with just cause on 17 August 2022, since the Player
refused to come to Lebanon.
26. Subsidiarily, in case it is considered that the Player terminated the contract with just
cause, the Club requested to reduce the compensation due to him, considering that the
Player signed a new contract with the new club. Moreover, the Club indicated that the
amount of USD 4,500 for accommodation shall be dismissed as no specific amount was
mentioned in the contract and said amount is linked to the presence of the player in
Lebanon.
27. The requests for relief of the Club:
-
-
USD 58,451,61 as compensation.
“to order the new club Finn Harps FC to pay jointly and severally the compensation due
to Al Ansar Club for the unilateral termination of the contract by the player without just
cause in the amount of USD 58,451.61”.
Interest as from 8 August 2022 until the date of effective payment.
Sporting sanctions to be applied on the Player and the new club.
c. Response of the Player to the counterclaim
28. The Player stated that the Club recognised the second contract and that the second
contract and the Player’s release letter was signed by the same person, Nabil Bader, and
thus the president of the Club was aware of the second contract.
29. The Player further indicated that the reply of the Club only took place once the Club was
exposed to being sued in front of FIFA, seeking compensation and disciplinary sanctions.
30. Additionally, the Player mentioned that the first contact with the new club was on 23
August 2022 after the contract with the Respondent/Counter-Claimant was terminated.
Page 6
REF FPSD-7026
31. The Player requested to dismiss the counterclaim and to fully accept the claim filed on 10
August 2022.
d. Position of the new club
32. The new club indicated that the first contact with the Player was on 23 August 2022 and
not before that date.
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
33. First of all, the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter also referred to as 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 10 August 2022 and
submitted for decision on 8 December 2022. Taking into account the wording of art. 34 of
the October 2022 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.
34. Subsequently, the members of 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 lit.
b) of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players October 2022 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 an
Spanish player and a Lebanese club, with a corresponding counterclaim involving an Irish
club.
35. 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. 26 par.
1 and 2 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (October 2022 edition),
and considering that the present claim was lodged on 10 August 2022, the July 2022
edition of said regulations (hereinafter: the Regulations) is applicable to the matter at hand
as to the substance.
b. Burden of proof
36. 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
Page 7
REF FPSD-7026
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
37. Its competence and the applicable regulations having been established, 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 the assessment of the matter at hand.
i. Main legal discussion and considerations
38. The foregoing having been established, the Chamber moved to the substance of the
matter, and took note of the fact that the parties strongly dispute termination of the
second contract and its consequences.
39. The Player considered that by correspondence 8 August 2022, he acknowledged the
termination by the Club, as the same did not reply to any of the correspondences sent by
the Player requesting information regarding his contractual situation. On the other hand,
the Club considered that the termination of the second Contract was on 16 August 2022,
as the Player did not travel to Lebanon.
40. In this context, the Chamber acknowledged that its task was to determine whether the
Contract was terminated by the Player or the Club with just cause and its consequences.
41. The Chamber noted that:
•
•
•
•
•
The release note sent to the Player did not contain any information that it referred
only to the first contract.
The Player sent 3 letters (on 20 July 2022, on 27 July 2022 and on 3 August 2022) to
the Club requesting information regarding his contractual situation and the Club did
not provide him with any information, other than a WhatsApp audio where it
indicated that there was no contract between the parties.
The Club only contacted the Player 2 days after the acknowledgement of termination
of the contract sent by the Player.
The two contracts were signed by the Player and Club on 20 November 2022 by the
same person who signed the Player’s release letter, the president of the Club, Mr
Nabil Bader. Thus, even if the new manager was not aware of the two contracts as
alleged by the Club, the president certainly was.
By 8 August 2022, the Club had not paid any amount to the Player under the second
contract (i.e., USD 10,000 to be paid on 1 July 2022).
Page 8
REF FPSD-7026
42. Based on the above, the Chamber concluded that the contract was terminated de facto
by the Player on 8 August 2022, and that the contract was terminated without just cause
by the Club.
ii. Consequences
43. Having stated the above, the members of the Chamber turned their attention to the
question of the consequences of such unjustified breach of contract committed by the
Club.
44. The Chamber observed that the outstanding remuneration at the time of termination,
coupled with the specific requests for relief of the player, is equivalent to USD 10,000.
45. As a consequence, and in accordance with the general legal principle of pacta sunt
servanda, the Chamber decided that the Club is liable to pay to the Player the amounts
which were outstanding under the contract at the moment of the termination, i.e., USD
10,000.
46. In addition, taking into consideration the Player’s request as well as the constant practice
of the Chamber in this regard, the latter decided to award the Player interest at the rate
of 5% p.a. on the outstanding amounts as from 8 August 2022 until the date of effective
payment.
47. As to the housing allowance requested by the Player, the Chamber noted that the second
contract does not include a fixed amount and no documentation was provided by the
Player on this matter. The Chamber thus decided not to award said amount as it lacked
contractual basis.
48. Having stated the above, the Chamber turned to the calculation of the amount of
compensation payable to the Player by the Club in the case at stake. In doing so, the
Chamber firstly recapitulated that, in accordance with art. 17 par. 1 of the Regulations,
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.
49. In application of the relevant provision, the Chamber held that it first of all had to clarify
as to whether the pertinent employment contract contained a provision by means of
which the parties had beforehand agreed upon an amount of compensation payable by
the contractual parties in the event of breach of contract. In this regard, the Chamber
Page 9
REF FPSD-7026
established that no such compensation clause was included in the employment contract
at the basis of the matter at stake.
50. 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.
51. Bearing in mind the foregoing as well as the claim of the Player, the Chamber proceeded
with the calculation of the monies payable to him under the terms of the contract from
the date of its unilateral termination until its end date. Consequently, the Chamber
concluded that the amount of USD 60,000 (i.e., 10 times USD 6,000) serves as the basis
for the determination of the amount of compensation for breach of contract.
52. In continuation, the Chamber verified as to whether the Player had signed an
employment contract with another club during the relevant period of time, by means of
which he would have been enabled to reduce his loss of income. According to the
constant practice of the DRC as well as art. 17 par. 1 lit. ii) of the Regulations, such
remuneration under a new employment contract 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.
53. Indeed, the Player found employment with the new club. In accordance with the pertinent
employment contract, the player was entitled to approximately EUR 390 per week.
Therefore, the Chamber concluded that the player mitigated his damages in the total
amount of USD 5,431.83/EUR 5,460, that is, EUR 390 times 14.
54. Consequently, on account of all of the above-mentioned considerations and the
specificities of the case at hand, the Chamber decided that the club must pay the amount
of USD 54,568.17 to the Player (i.e., 60,000 minus 5,431.83), which was to be considered
a reasonable and justified amount of compensation for breach of contract in the present
matter.
55. Lastly, taking into consideration the player’s request as well as the constant practice of
the Chamber in this regard, the latter decided to award the Player interest on said
compensation at the rate of 5% p.a. as from 10 August 2022 until the date of effective
payment.
iii. Compliance with monetary decisions
56. 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
Page 10
REF FPSD-7026
concerned party to pay the relevant amounts of outstanding remuneration and/or
compensation in due time.
57. 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.
58. Therefore, bearing in mind the above, the DRC decided that the Club must pay the full
amount due (including all applicable interest) to the Player within 45 days of notification
of the decision, failing which, at the request of the Player, 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 Club in
accordance with art. 24 par. 2, 4, and 7 of the Regulations.
59. The Club shall make full payment (including all applicable interest) to the bank account
provided by the Player in the Bank Account Registration Form, which is attached to the
present decision.
60. 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
61. 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.
62. 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.
63. Lastly, the DRC concluded its deliberations by rejecting any other requests for relief made
by any of the parties.
Page 11
REF FPSD-7026
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant/Counter-Respondent 1, Jaime Siaj Romero, is partially accepted.
2.
The counterclaim of the Respondent/Counter-Claimant, Ansar, is rejected.
3.
The Respondent/Counter-Claimant, has to pay to the Claimant/Counter-Respondent 1,
the following amounts:
- USD 10,000 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 8 August 2022
until the date of effective payment; and
- USD 54,568.17 as compensation for breach of contract without just cause plus 5%
interest p.a. as from 10 August 2022 until the date of effective payment.
4.
Any further claims of the Claimant/Counter-Respondent are rejected.
5.
Full payment (including all applicable interest) shall be made to the bank account
indicated in the enclosed Bank Account Registration Form.
6.
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/Counter-Claimant 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.
7.
The consequences shall only be enforced at the request of the Claimant/CounterRespondent 1 in accordance with art. 24 par. 7 and 8 and art. 25 of the Regulations on
the Status and Transfer of Players.
8.
This decision is rendered without costs.
For the Football Tribunal:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
Page 12
REF FPSD-7026
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).
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 13