Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF. FPSD-15482
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 13 March 2025
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the Player Karim Rossi
COMPOSITION:
Frans DE WEGER (The Netherlands), Chairperson
Bruinewoud Alexandra GOMEZ (Uruguay & the Netherlands), Member
Oleg ZADUBROVSKIY (Russia), Member
CLAIMANT:
Karim Rossi, Switzerland
Represented by Hervé Bochud
RESPONDENT
KARMIOTISSA POLEMIDION, Cyprus
Represented by Christoforos Florou
pg. 2
REF. FPSD-15482
I. Facts of the case
1.
The parties to the present case are:
-
2.
the Swiss player, Karim Rossi (hereinafter: the Player or the Claimant); and
the Cypriot club, KARMIOTISSA POLEMIDION (hereinafter: the Club or the Respondent).
On 10 August 2023, the Player signed a document called pre-contract (hereinafter: the Precontract), in which he accepted the following conditions sent by Club:
“Duration: 11/08/2023 – 31/05/2024
Season 2023/24: 10 months x €5.500 net (total €55.000) net
Allowances:
- Accommodation / Car
- Flights : 2 times return tickets for 2 adults and 1 child for route Zurich – Larnaca.
Bonuses : € 5.000 for finishing in Top 6”
3.
The Pre-contract also included the following:
“Please note that the above-mentioned contractual terms are nothing more than an invitation
to negotiate and they do not constitute an irrevocable offer for the signing of an employment
contract. An employment contract with the above terms will be signed only if the Player is free
of any other employment contract and upon the successful medical and ergo examinations of
the Player, thus we invite the Player to Cyprus to undertake the said medical and ergo exams
no later than Monday 14/08/2023.”
4.
On 14 August 2023, the Claimant and the Respondent entered into an employment
agreement (hereinafter: the Contract) valid as from 14 August 2023 to 30 June 2024.
5.
According to clause 1 of the Contract, the Player was entitled to receive 10 monthly
instalments of EUR 1,000 net, starting on 20 September 2023, with each subsequent
payment due on the 20th of each month until the full amount is paid.
6.
Clause 1.5 of the Contract read as follows:
“Any other benefits and/or allowances: House and car will be provided by the club. Two return
tickets for the player, wife and child for the route Switzerland – Cyprus – Switzerland will be
provided by the club.”
7.
Clause 2 of the Contract reads as follows:
“2. Terms of Employment
pg. 3
REF. FPSD-15482
2.1 The present Contract is regulated by the provisions of the Standard Employment Contract,
as these have been agreed upon between the Cyprus Football Association (CFA) and the Cyprus
Footballers' Union (PASP) and as these provisions have been codified in Annex 1 of the CFA
Registration and Transfer of Players Regulations.
2.2 The terms of the Standard Employment Contract constitute an integral part of the
present Contract having full and direct implementation The standard employment
contract is attached as Appendix A to this agreement signed by both Parties.
2.3. In case of conflict, the terms of the Standard Employment Contract shall take precedence
over the terms of the present Contract.”
8.
Annexe 1 of the Contract (hereinafter: the Annexe) read as follows:
“ANNEXE 1 TO THE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
IMAGE RIGHTS PAYMENTS FOR THE PLAYER: KARIM ROSSI
1. The Club pays to the Player a remuneration for the use of the Player’s image rights from
14/08/2023 until 30/06/2024 in the amount of € 40.500.00 (Forty Thousand five Hundred
Euro NET in the following order:
€3.000 (Three Thousand) Euro NET
€3.000 (Three Thousand) Euro NET
€3.000 (Three Thousand) Euro NET
€4.500 (Four Thousand Five Hundred) Euro
NET
€4.500 (Four Thousand Five Hundred) Euro
NET
€4.500 (Four Thousand Five Hundred) Euro
NET
€4.500 (Four Thousand Five Hundred) Euro
NET
€4.500 (Four Thousand Five Hundred) Euro
NET
€4.500 (Four Thousand Five Hundred) Euro
NET
€4.500 (Four Thousand Five Hundred) Euro
NET
Till 20th September 2023
Till 20th October 2023
Till 20th November 2023
Till 20th December 2023
Till 20th January 2024
Till 20th February 2024
Till 20th March 2024
Till 20th April 2024
Till 20th May 2024
Till 20th June 2024
2. The Player will be entitled to the following bonuses:
2.1 If the Player will participate in 5 of the official games of the Club between the dates
18.08.2023-20.11.2024, then he will receive € 2.500.
pg. 4
REF. FPSD-15482
2.2 If the player will score/assist between the dates 18.08.2023 -20.11.2024 will receive € 300
per goal/assist.
2.3 If the player scores 10 goals will during the Cyprus League season will receive € 3.000.”
9.
The Standard Employment Contract (hereinafter: the Standard Contract) was also signed by
the Claimant and the Respondent.
10. Clause 10 of the Standard Contract read as follows:
“ The Player is entitled to 24 days of paid leave for every employment period of 48 weeks, or, in
case of shorter employment the corresponding proportion. If the requested leave falls within
the paying season, it will be subject to the approval of the Club.”
11. Clause 13 of the Standard Contract reads as follows:
“Dispute Resolution
Any employment dispute between the Club and the Player shall fall under the exclusive
jurisdiction of the National Dispute Resolution Chamber of the CFA and shall be resolved
according to the applicable regulations of the CFA .”
12. On 16 October 2023, the Claimant and the president of the Club held the following
communications (quoted verbatim):
“ [Player]: Hello Mr President, Yiannis has advised me to contact you. l'm very disappointed
with the way 1 have been treated from first day until now. I came here with my wife and
daughter but my rent of 1800€ has not been paid. In August the reason why I accept such low
conditions is because you gave me your word you will take full charge of the appartment. On
top of that l'm missing several paiement such as, 2000€ far 5 games played, 30% Salary Cut,
400€ far rent, 300€ goal bonus. 1 don't want to be chasing my duty every month.
[President]: “We speak tomorrow just now I arrive BUT PLAY FOOTBALL WIN ANO FOR ME
NOBODY LOSS NOTHING”
13. On 9 May 2024, the Claimant and the president of the Club held the following
communications via the application WhatsApp (quoted verbatim):
“[Player]: Hello Mr President, hope you are well. You said Monday that we will speak after the
game for my situation. Also I'm wondering about my April Salary because I receive 0 until now
and all other players
[President]: Hello […] I travel again and I FORGET SALARY TAKE everyone Monday before you
go holiday […]”
pg. 5
REF. FPSD-15482
14. On 24 May 2024, the Claimant and a Manager of the Club held the following
communications via the application WhatsApp:
“[Manager]: Good morning Karim!! Just let me know your time being in Limassol to arrange my
schedule
[Player]: Good morning Mr Yiannis Unfortunately I will not be able to see you today. Due to
family matters I had to travel to Switzerland. l'm still waiting for my April Salary and bonuses.
Our last meetings on 11th May and 20th May you didn't want to pay my salary and you were
threatening me with the president's body guards.
[there is a message that was deleted from the Respondent’s manager]
[Manager]: What time is your flight? lf you want I can visit you in larnaca
[a missed call from the Respondent’s manager]”
15. On 24 May 2024, the Respondent sent the Claimant the following letter:
“It has come to our attention that you have left Cyprus on 23.05.2024 and travelled abroad. Y
our contract expires at the end of May 2024.
Based on internal regulations article 13 paragraph 10 any player wishing to travel abroad for
any reason must first get official permission from the club.
Taking into consideration that you have travelled abroad without any permission and as the
training sessions continue taking place,
we are asking you to be back by Monday 27.05.2024 and attend the 17:00h training session at
Ayios Tychonas pitch.
If you do not come and attend the training, there will be sanctions according to the internal
regulations of the club.”
16. On 25 May 2024, the Claimant responded to the Respondent by stating that, like most of
the players, he had left the country at the end of the season, as there were no further
sporting obligations, and he had duly informed the Club’s directors of his departure. He
further alleged that the Respondent had failed to pay the rent for his accommodation,
which nearly led to his eviction. Additionally, the Claimant pointed out that in October 2023,
the Respondent had not paid him EUR 2,500 as a participation fee for five league matches,
and had unjustifiably reduced his salary by EUR 1,200. He also claimed that in December
2023, the Respondent had threatened to withhold his salary unless he signed a document
waiving part of it. As a result of these issues, the Claimant demanded that the Respondent
pg. 6
REF. FPSD-15482
pay him EUR 14,565, representing his April salary and outstanding arrears from 2023 and
2024, within 15 days.
17. On 29 May 2024, the Respondent sent to the Claimant a “notice for disciplinary procedure”,
in which it invited the Claimant to provide his position as to leaving “the Club and the country
without the consent of the Club in breach of the Club’s internal regulations”, by no later than 3
June 2024.
18. On 30 May 2024, the Respondent paid the Claimant EUR 1,000.
19. On the same day, the Claimant replied to the Respondent in relation to the disciplinary
notice, and mentioned that:
“My client hereby objects to your letter of today's date, surprisingly entitled "Notice for
Disciplinary Procedure", in its entirety. There is absolutely no need for such a "procedure".
As already mentioned, my client has nothing to reproach himself for. He left Cyprus with his
family in all legality on Friday, May 24th to go on holiday, the league and training having come
to an end due to the end of the season which preceded his departure.
It should be pointed out that his team-mates left the country much earlier than he did, between
May 11th and 13th. Since then, none of them have returned to take part in any club activities, as
they are still all on authorized holidays.
And although he reminded your club on the day of his departure that he would be leaving the
country, there was no need to do so.
Consequently, in view of the situation you are trying to impose on my client, he will not be
attending this "disciplinary" meeting, which looks like a final ambush to find just grounds for
terminating his contract, which the club does not currently have. Your approach is unfounded
and illegal, and your demands are both excessive and unjustified.
My client deplores the dishonest approach taken by the members of your club, who are not
newcomers to the game, as can be seen from the contents of my letter dated last Saturday.
Accordingly, my client hereby confirms the entire contents and corresponding claims of the said
letter dated May 25th. Your club therefore has 11 days left in which to remedy its shortcomings
by paying its debts to my client. […]”
20. On 5 June 2024, the Club’s Disciplinary committee issued a decision in which it found that
the Claimant left the Club without permission and fined him with EUR 500. This decision
also contained the information in which the Claimant would be able to appeal within 3
days.
pg. 7
REF. FPSD-15482
21. On 11 June 2024, the Claimant sent a termination notice of the Contract mentioning that
to that date the Respondent failed to pay EUR 13,565 and objected to the letter dated 5
June 2024.
22. On 14 June 2024, the Respondent paid EUR 500.
i.i. Cyprus Regulations for the Registration and Transfer of Football Players and the
NDRC Procedural Regulations – July 2020 edition (hereinafter: NDRC regulations)
23. Art. 22 par. 1 of the NDRC Regulations read as follows:
“The National Dispute Resolution Committee (NDRC) as First Instance Body shall have the
competence to adjudicate and/ or resolve any financial and/or other disputes which may arise:
A. Between member Clubs of CFA and Professional players regarding the employment and
stability in their contractual relations. […]”
24. Art. 22 par. 2 of the NDRC Regulations read as follows:
“RIGHT TO APPEAL
1. The decisions of the NDRC can only be appealed before CAS (Court of Arbitration for Sports.
Appeals Committee of Dispute Resolution Committee
Appeals can be filed before CAS according to the relevant Statutes of CAS.”
25. Art. 22 par. 4 of the NDRC Regulations read as follows:
“The National Dispute Resolution Committee (NDRC) will be formed in a body from the following
members at least fifteen days before the expiration date of the term of the previous NDRC:
a) two members of the NDRC, will be elected by the Board of Directors of CFA and two members
of the NDRC will be elected by PFA with a procedure that will be decided in common.
b) if The Board of Directors of CFA and/or PFA deny or neglect to appoint any member of the
NDRC, within the specified time limit, then the respective president of the Pancyprian Bar
Association will appoint a member or members based on the case.
c) the four elected or appointed members of the NDRC, must then within fifteen days to elect the
President and Vice- President of the NDRC. Provided that, the President and the Vice- President
of the NDRC will not come from the four already elected or appointed members. The decision
must be unanimously for the appointment of the President or Vice-President of the NDRC.
pg. 8
REF. FPSD-15482
d) in case that the four members of the NDRC, are not able to elect President or Vice- President
of the NDRC, respectively, with the specified time limit that is specified in the present Regulation,
then the respective president of the Pancyprian Bar Association will appoint within fifteen days
the President and/or Vice-President of the NDRC.
e) the NDRC will meet with the presence of at least three (3) members including the President or
the Vice- President. In all cases, a quorum will be formed only when in a meeting of the NDRC,
an equal number of members will be present from the Board of Directors of CFA and PFA and
the President or Vice-President of NDRC.
2. Until the new members are elected, all duties of the NDRC shall be performed by the previous
members and all matters which are already under discussion or all cases which are already on
hearing, shall be discussed and decided by the previous NDRC.
3. Prior to their appointment or election, the candidate members of the National Dispute
Resolution Committee must notify the Board of Directors of CFA of any interest they may have,
whether direct or indirect in relation to any club, player or attorney presenting himself before
the NDRC and must also state in writing that they possess the qualifications specified in the
paragraph 22.5 herein below”.
26. Art. 22 par. 11 of the NDRC Regulations read as follows:
“1. When under the circumstances, there is justifiable doubt regarding the impartiality of a
member of the NDRC, the above mentioned member will be withdrawn immediately. This
obligation arises particularly when:
a) He is directly or indirectly part to the dispute in question, either personally or as a
representative entity.
b) His affiliated club or a member of his family is connected in some way with the issue in
question (i.e. husband or wife, blood relative or relative by marriage of a party or of his
representative) or there is a close relationship, or friendship, or personal rivalry, with any of
the parties or with his representative.
2. Any member that shall withdraw should inform the Chairman of the NDRC immediately.
3. Objection may arise for a member of the NDRC by the parties when there is reasonable doubt
regarding the impartiality of a member of the NDRC. Any of the parties who wishes to raise an
objection in regards with any member, shall file a written statement to the NDRC within five
days from the day he raised the reasons of his objection. If a written statement will not be filed
within the five days, the right of objection is lost. The application should contain an accurate
statement of the grounds and set forth the evidences.”
27. Art. 22 par. 13 of the NDRC Regulations read as follows:
pg. 9
REF. FPSD-15482
“22.13 FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS DURING PROCEDURE
During procedure all fundamental rights of the parties shall be respected and especially the
right to equal treatment and the right of hearing.”
28. Arts. 22 para 14 and subsequent paras. of the NDRC Regulations referred to the Procedural
Rules.
29. Art. 22 par. 39.5 of the NDRC Regulations read as follows:
“When the NDRC issues its decision by which awards compensation or worked and ought to be
paid, the party who must comply with the decision has the right to submit a written application
to the NDRC in order to pay the amount of claim by periodic payments, and the NDRC shall
decide on the issue after listening the interested parties. Moreover, such application cannot be
submitted after the expiry of thirty days from the date of issuing the NDRC’s decision.
Any amounts due for wages can be paid off in 24 installments and the awarded amounts for
compensation can be paid in a longer period according to the judgment of the Committee.”
30. The NDRC Regulations also included fees ”expenses” for filing claims before the Cyprus
NDRC.
II. Proceedings before FIFA
31. On 6 April 2024, the Claimant filed the claim at hand before FIFA. A summary of the parties’
respective positions is detailed below.
a. Claim of the Claimant
32. The Claimant asserted that the Respondent had failed to pay his outstanding
remuneration. Specifically, the Claimant stated that the Respondent owed him: (i) EUR
11,000 net in unpaid salaries for April and May 2024 and EUR 3,600 net as reimbursement
for April and May 2024 housing allowance; (ii) EUR 1,800 net as reimbursement for the
September 2023 housing allowance; (iii) EUR 2,500 net for five match bonuses; (iv) EUR 600
net as reimbursement for October 2023 housing allowance; (v) EUR 3,000 net as
performance bonuses, calculated at EUR 300 for each of eight goals and two assists; and
(vi) EUR 565 as reimbursement for a flight ticket.
33. The Claimant further argued that he terminated the contract with just cause in accordance
with art. 14bis of the RSTP. However, he mentioned that “given that the contract was
terminated on 11 June 2024 (exhibit 5), i.e. at the very end of the season and outside the mercato
period, art. 17 of the FIFA RSTP does not apply, as to whether the Claimant has opportunity to
find a new football club until 30 June 2024, and the obligation to inform the Respondent of the
remuneration that he would earn until that date, which would then be deducted from the total
pg. 10
REF. FPSD-15482
amount that he would have to pay to the Respondent. The Claimant therefore has no sums
received from another club/employer until 30 June 2024 to deduct from what the Respondent
owes him.”
34. Regarding the disciplinary measures, the Claimant argued that the imposed sanction
of EUR 500 was unjustified. He contended that he had left only after the season officially
ended on 11 May 2024, at which point there were no scheduled training sessions.
Furthermore, he emphasized that the new season was not set to begin until August 2024,
and therefore, the period between May and June 2024 should be considered as part of the
official holiday break. As such, the Claimant maintained that his departure during this time
did not warrant any disciplinary action.
35. The Claimant requested the following relief:
“1. Le club du Karmiotissa FC by Punin Ltd, le Défendeur, est débiteur de M. Karim Rossi, le
Demandeur, et lui doit immédiatement paiement de la somme de EUR 13'100.- nets, à titre de
salaires et loyers d’avril (salaire EUR 5'500.- et loyer EUR 1'800.-) et de mai 2024 (salaire EUR
5'500.- et loyer EUR 1'800.-), (dont les déductions déjà appliquées des acomptes reçus de EUR
1'000.- et EUR 500.-), avec intérêts à 5% à partir de la date d’exigibilité de la créance à savoir
respectivement le 15 mai et le 15 juin 2024.
2. Le club du Karmiotissa FC by Punin Ltd, le Défendeur, est débiteur de M. Karim Rossi, le
Demandeur, et lui doit paiement de la somme de EUR 1'800.- nets, à titre de remboursement
du loyer de septembre 2023, avec intérêts à 5% à partir de la date d’exigibilité de la créance à
savoir le 30 septembre 2023.
3. Le club du Karmiotissa FC by Punin Ltd, le Défendeur, est débiteur de M. Karim Rossi, le
Demandeur, et lui doit paiement de la somme de EUR 2'500.- nets, à titre de bonus pour avoir
participé à cinq matchs, avec intérêts à 5% à partir de la date d’exigibilité de la créance à savoir
le 30 novembre 2023.
4. Le club du Karmiotissa FC by Punin Ltd, le Défendeur, est débiteur de M. Karim Rossi, le
Demandeur, et lui doit paiement de la somme de EUR 600.- nets, à titre de paiement de la part
de salaire déduite sans raison sur le salaire d’octobre 2023, avec intérêts à 5% à partir de la
date d’exigibilité de la créance à savoir le 31 octobre 2023.
5. Le club du Karmiotissa FC by Punin Ltd, le Défendeur, est débiteur de M. Karim Rossi, le
Demandeur, et lui doit paiement de la somme de EUR 3'000.- nets, à titre de différence de loyer
de EUR 600.- par mois sur les cinq mois de novembre 2023 à mars 2024 inclus, avec intérêts à
5% à partir de la date d’exigibilité de la créance à savoir le 30 juin 2024.
6. Le club du Karmiotissa FC by Punin Ltd, le Défendeur, est débiteur de M. Karim Rossi, le
Demandeur, et lui doit paiement de la somme de EUR 3'000.- nets, à titre de bonus pour avoir
pg. 11
REF. FPSD-15482
participé, marqué huit buts et effectué deux assists lors de la saison, avec intérêts à 5% à partir
de la date d’exigibilité de la créance à savoir le 30 juin 2024.
7. Le club du Karmiotissa FC by Punin Ltd, le Défendeur, est débiteur de M. Karim Rossi, le
Demandeur, et lui doit paiement de la somme de EUR 565.- nets, à titre de remboursement des
billets d’avion Larnaca-Genève (24 mai 2024), avec intérêts à 5% à partir de la date d’exigibilité
de la créance à savoir le 30 juin 2024.
8. Les sommes précitées, soit un total de EUR 24'565.- (vingt-quatre mille cinq cent soixantecinq
euros) nets, sont à verser sur le compte bancaire suivant […] »
Freely translated to English :
“1. The club Karmiotissa FC by Punin Ltd, the Respondent, is indebted to Mr Karim Rossi, the
Claimant, and owes him immediate payment of the sum of EUR 13,100 net, by way of salary
and rent for April (salary EUR 5,500 and rent EUR 1,800) and May 2024 (salary EUR 5,500 and
rent EUR 1,800). -) and May 2024 (salary EUR 5,500 and rent EUR 1,800), (including the
deductions already made from the advance payments received of EUR 1,000 and EUR 500),
with interest at 5% from the due date of the claim, i.e. 15 May and 15 June 2024 respectively.
2. The club Karmiotissa FC by Punin Ltd, the Respondent, is indebted to Mr Karim Rossi, the
Claimant, and owes him payment of the sum of EUR 1,800 net, by way of reimbursement of the
rent for September 2023, with interest at 5% from the due date of the claim, i.e. 30 September
2023.
3. The club Karmiotissa FC by Punin Ltd, the Respondent, is indebted to Mr Karim Rossi, the
Claimant, and owes him the sum of EUR 2,500 net, by way of bonus for taking part in five
matches, with interest at 5% from the due date of the claim, i.e. 30 November 2023.
4. The club Karmiotissa FC by Punin Ltd, the Respondent, is indebted to Mr Karim Rossi, the
Claimant, and owes him payment of the sum of EUR 600 net, by way of payment of the part of
the salary deducted without reason from the salary for October 2023, with interest at 5% from
the due date of the claim, i.e. 31 October 2023.
5. The club Karmiotissa FC by Punin Ltd, the Respondent, is indebted to Mr Karim Rossi, the
Claimant, and owes him payment of the sum of EUR 3,000 net, by way of the difference in rent
of EUR 600 per month over the five months from November 2023 to March 2024 inclusive, with
interest at 5% from the due date of the claim, i.e. 30 June 2024.
6. The club Karmiotissa FC by Punin Ltd, the Respondent, is indebted to Mr Karim Rossi, the
Claimant, and owes him payment of the sum of EUR 3,000 net, by way of bonus for having
played, scored eight goals and made two assists during the season, with interest at 5% from
the due date of the debt, namely 30 June 2024.
pg. 12
REF. FPSD-15482
7. The club Karmiotissa FC by Punin Ltd, the Respondent, is indebted to Mr Karim Rossi, the
Claimant, and owes him payment of the sum of EUR 565 net, by way of reimbursement of the
Larnaca-Geneva air tickets (24 May 2024), with interest at 5% from the due date of the claim,
i.e. 30 June 2024.
8. The aforementioned sums, totalling EUR 24,565 (twenty-four thousand five hundred and
sixty-five euros) net, are to be paid into the following bank account […]”
b. Reply of the Respondent
36. In its reply, the Respondent stated that FIFA has no jurisdiction and, in any case, to reject
the claim.
Jurisdiction:
37. The Respondent argued that there is an exclusive jurisdiction clause in favour of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber of Cyprus (hereinafter: Cyprus NDRC) and it rejected the
jurisdiction of FIFA
38. First, the Respondent argued that, pursuant to clause 2.2 of the Contract, the Standard
Contract formed an integral part of the agreement. Furthermore, in accordance with clause
2.3, the Standard Contract was to prevail in the event of any conflict between the two
documents. The Respondent emphasized that clause 13 of the Standard Contract clearly
established the exclusive jurisdiction of the Cyprus NDRC. Additionally, the Respondent
noted that the Standard Contract constituted a collective bargaining agreement, having
been concluded between the Cyprus Football Association (CFA) and the Pancyprian
Footballers Association (PFA), which is affiliated with FIFPRO.
39. Therefore, according to the Respondent, the Cyprus NDRC is the only competent body to
hear the dispute and FIFA has no jurisdiction.
40. Second, as to the composition of the Cyprus NDRC and equal representation. The
Respondent mentioned that pursuant to art. 22.4.2. of the NDRC Regulations, the PFA, the
CFA and clubs have equal representation.
41. The Respondent further added that :
“IF, for any reason whatsoever, the CFA and/or pXsP deny or neglect to appoint their two
members ? then the CFA and PASP agreed to authorize the Cyprus Bar Association to appoint
this person and/or persons accordingly. In such case this person and/or persons are coming
from the Cyprus Bar Association’s members, i.e. they are licensed lawyers. The Cyprus Football
Association is independent body in Cyprus which regulates the professional licensed lawyers in
Cyprus (attached as APPENDIX F)
pg. 13
REF. FPSD-15482
The President and the vice president shall be duly elected by the four members of the NDRC
following democratic elections and due process. They can either be a CFA or PASP
representatives. From the moment that they are legitimately elected and acceptable by both
sides, there is no reason why this would in any way affect the principle of equal representation.
If, for any reason whatsoever, the 4 members of the NDRC cannot reach a decision of the
President or the Vice President, e.g. the player representatives and/or the CFA representatives
refuse to vote, then, in order to avoid deadlock, the CFA and PASP agreed to authorize the Cyprus
Bar Association to appoint this person and/or persons. Needless to say, the Cyprus Bar
Association is an office which is totally independent and has not ties either with the CFA, or with
the PASP.
Therefore, the CFA NDRC is composed by six members, i.e. the President (independent
member), o the VICE President (independent member) and the four member appointed equal
by the CFA and the PASP as described above.”
42. In view of the above, the Respondent concluded that the Cyprus NDRC have equal influence
and fulfils the principle of parity and equal representation.
43. Third, according to the Respondent, the Cyprus NDRC fulfilled the principles of
independent and impartial Tribunal and referred to art 22.11 and 22.12 of the NDRC
Regulations.
44. Four, the Respondent mentioned that the Cyprus NDRC fulfils the principle of a fair hearing
and referred to arts. 22.13 and 22.14 of the NDRC Regulations and mentioned that the
Cyprus NDRC’s decisions can be appealed to CAS (cf. art 22.2 of the NDRC Regulations).
45. Fifth, The Respondent referred to arts. 22.15, 22.16 and art. 22.20 of the NDRC Regulations
according to which both parties have the right to provide its positions, and that it follows
the same principles as FIFA and CAS.
46. Six, the Respondent referred to art. 22.13 of the NDRC Regulations and mentioned that the
regulations do not make any distinction between clubs and players.
47. Finally, the Respondent referred to page 56 of the NDRC Regulations, which outlined the
procedural fees, noting that these fees are determined based on the amount claimed. The
Respondent emphasized that, in the event of a successful claim, the Respondent would be
ordered to reimburse the Claimant for these fees, provided that the Claimant had explicitly
requested such reimbursement in his claim. Furthermore, the Respondent argued that the
amounts stipulated in the NDRC Regulations are significantly lower than those charged by
the CAS and therefore, the administrative fees imposed by the NDRC Regulations do not
constitute an obstacle to a party’s right to access justice.
Image Rights agreement
pg. 14
REF. FPSD-15482
48. In case FIFA is competent, the Respondent argued the following:
“In this case, when the Committee analyzes the documentation on file, specifically the contract,
the standard contract, and the Image Rights Agreement, it shall conclude that the Image Rights
Contract DOES NOT contain elements that would lead to the belief that it was not, in fact, a
separate agreement to the employment contract but is an Image Rights contract per se, since
there is no direct link to the player’s services as a player.
In particular, the Image Rights Agreement does not reference any benefits and/or allowances
that the player would be entitled to as a player. It only provides the consideration for the use of
the Player's image rights by the club. Therefore, the Committee cannot conclude that such an
Image Rights contract should be regarded as a supplementary agreement to the employment
contract, meaning that FIFA is NOT in a position to consider said Image Rights contract when
assessing the Claimant’s claim.”
Response to the arguments of the Claimant
49. The Respondent fully rejects the Claimant’s claim. The Respondent argued the following:
“The Player decided unilaterally and without taking any consent, to leave from Cyprus on the
24/05/2024, i.e. one month before the expiration of his contract.
The Club has contacted the Player to attend his employment, however he has never return to
Cyprus and into his employment obligation. The fact that the league has come to an end, does
not constitute a valid reason for his behavior to leave the country without the approval of the
club as provided by the Club internal regulations during the term of his contract. The trainings
of the club and the sporting obligations are continuing and therefore he should comply with
contractual obligation until the expiration of your employment agreement. Also, it cannot be
accepted the allegation provided from the Player’s lawyer through his letters dated 29/05/2024
and 25/05/2024 that ’the majority of the players’ of the Club has left the country and therefore
this gave him the right to leave the country without a prior permission, breaching essential terms
of his employment agreement and of the internal regulations of the Club.
Based on the above, the Disciplinary Committee of the Club has started a disciplinary procedure
against the Player and after invited him to defend himself, the disciplinary Committee has
imposed to him €500 as penalty.
The club has paid in total to the Player the amount of €9.500 out of €10.000 after deducting the
penalty of €500. Please as Appendix H find attached a buddle of receipts of payment accordingly.
The Club has covered the rents of the Player including the payment of the rent for September
2023 where the Club paid to him an additional amount of €600 for his salary for the October
pg. 15
REF. FPSD-15482
2023 which has been deducted by his salary (Appendix I). Therefore, the claims of the Player
through the Statement of Claim under the points 2, 3 and 5 of his statement of claim are
rejected.
Considering the abovementioned the FIFA DRC shall conclude that claims of the claimant is
unreasonable and therefore the FIFA DRC shall reject these.
The Club admits that it shall pay the air ticket of the Player however it has not been notified to
the Club such claim before.”
50. In support of the above allegations the Respondent provided inter alia the following
documents:
-
A copy of the Standard Contract signed by both parties.
-
A copy of the Cyprus Regulations for the Registration and Transfer of Football Players
and the NDRC Procedural Regulations.
-
Information about the Pancyprian Footballers Association.
-
Information about the Cyprus Bar Association.
-
Payment voucher of EUR 1,000 as “August salary”.
-
Payment voucher of EUR 1,000 as “Salary September 2023” dated 30 August 2023.
-
Payment voucher of EUR 1,000 as “Salary October”.
-
Payment voucher of EUR 1,000 as “Salary November”.
-
Payment voucher of EUR 1,000 dated 30 December 2023.
-
Payment voucher of EUR 1,000 as “Salary January”.
-
Payment voucher of EUR 1,000 as “Salary February”.
-
Payment voucher of EUR 1,000 as “Salary March”.
-
An untranslated bank document of 30 May 2024, in which it can be retrieved the
name of the Player and that the amount paid of EUR 1,000 as April salary.
-
An untranslated bank document of 13 June 2024, in which it can be retrieved the
name of the Player and the amount paid of EUR 500 as “May salary - penalty” salary.
pg. 16
REF. FPSD-15482
-
An untranslated bank document of 28 November 2023 in the amount of EUR 1,800.
c. Replica of the Claimant
51. In his replica, the Claimant asserted that FIFA had jurisdiction over the matter. He argued
that the Cyprus NDRC could not guarantee sufficient impartiality.
52. As to the Annexe, the Claimant mentioned that the Respondent did not provide any
justification in order to distinguish the salary and the image rights and that the amounts
mentioned in Annex corresponded to the Player’s remuneration and not related to an
image rights agreement.
53. The Player’s request for relief remained unchanged.
d. Duplica of the Respondent
54. The Respondent mentioned that FIFA has no jurisdiction, and that the Claimant did not
present any argument to demonstrate that the principles (i.e. fair proceedings, equal
representation, right to be heard) or any evidence to exclude the NDRC Regulations.
55. As to the image right agreement (the Annex), it position remained the same.
56. The Respondent requested the following:
“For all the above-mentioned reasons, you are kindly requested to reject the Claimant’s claim as
inadmissible in front of FIFA Football Tribunal since the FIFA FOOTBALL TRIBUNAL does not have
jurisdiction to deal with this matter.
OR
In case, the Chamber decides that it is competent to hear this matter in substance, then FIFA
DRC shall reject the Claimant’s requests for reliefs as unreasonable.”
pg. 17
REF. FPSD-15482
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
57. 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 6 August 2024 and submitted for decision on
13 March 2025. Taking into account the wording of art. 31 and 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.
58. 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 -in principle - competent to deal with the
matter at stake, which concerns an employment-related dispute with an international
dimension between a Swiss player and a Cypriot club.
59. Notwithstanding, the Chamber took note of the fact that the Club challenged the
jurisdiction of FIFA to deal with the present matter.
60. More specifically, the Club alleged that the Cypriot NDRC was competent to deal with the
present matter, by virtue of clause 13 of the Standard Contract, and that said deciding body
was an equitably represented, independent, national arbitration tribunal as required by
the Regulations. Therefore, according to the Club, considering that the Contract included
an exclusive clause, FIFA did not have jurisdiction to hear the claim.
61. Moreover, the Chamber observed that the Respondent stressed that FIFA has no
jurisdiction over the Annexe alleging that it was an image right agreement.
62. Considering the arguments of the Club with respect to the jurisdiction of the FIFA DRC, the
Chamber considered it had first to analyse its jurisdiction, and it had to do so considering
the agreements signed by the parties.
Does FIFA have jurisdiction over the Annexe 1 of the Contract?
63. The DRC considered pertinent to first address the argument of the Club that the Annex is
an image rights agreement and that the DRC could not hear this part of the claim. The
Player on the other hand, indicated that the amounts in the Annex are part of his salary.
64. In this regard, the Chamber recalled that, as a general rule, if there are separate
agreements, the Football Tribunal tends to consider the agreement on image rights as such
and does not have the competence to deal with it. However, such conclusion might be
pg. 18
REF. FPSD-15482
different if specific elements of the separate agreement suggest that it was in fact meant
to be part of the actual employment relationship.
65. In the case at hand, such elements appear to exist. In particular the Chamber observed
that (i) the Annexe is not an additional agreement as it is clearly mentioned as “Annexe 1 to
the employment contract” and (ii) the Annexe contains inter alia the same date of payment
as per the salaries and a monthly payment which is typical for employment contracts and
not for image rights agreements and grant bonuses for the Players performance in the
Club’s matches. Consequently, the Chamber concluded that the Annex is not an image
rights agreement and determined that said agreement was in fact an additional annex to
the employment contract instead, and thus that both documents should be entertained
together.
Does FIFA have jurisdiction over the Employment Contract and Annex?
66. In continuation, the Chamber reverted to the allegation of the Club that the Cypriot NDRC
was competent to deal with the present matter.
67. In this context, the Chamber reverted to the Transitional measures established in art. 26
par. 1 lit c) of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (February, June and
October 2024, and January 2025 editions) establishes that “Article 22 paragraph 1 b) and c)
shall apply only to cases brought to FIFA as from 1 January 2025. Any other case shall be
assessed according to the previous regulations”. As a result, the Chamber decided that it had
to assess this part of the claim applying the June 2024 edition of the Regulations, as this
claim was brought to FIFA on 6 August2024 and thus, before 1 January 2025.
68. In this regard, the Chamber emphasised that in accordance with art. 22, par. 1, lit. b) of the
June 2024 edition of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players , FIFA is, in
principle, competent to hear an employment-related dispute between a club and a player
of an international dimension. Nevertheless, the parties may explicitly opt in writing for
such dispute to be decided by an independent arbitration tribunal that has been
established at national level within the framework of the association and/or a collective
bargaining agreement, and which must guarantee fair proceedings and respect the
principle of equal representation of players and clubs. Any such arbitration clause must be
included either directly in the contract or in a collective bargaining agreement applicable
to the parties.
69. Additionally, the Chamber referred to the Circular no. 1010, which establishes the
minimum principles that decision-making bodies must adhere to.
70. Having stated the above, the Chamber pointed out that should, first and foremost, analyse
whether the provision contained in clause 13 of the Standard Contract constituted a clear
and exclusive jurisdiction clause in favour of the Cyprus NDRC. The Chamber hereby
recalled the wording thereof, which stipulated:
pg. 19
REF. FPSD-15482
“Any employment dispute between the Club and the Player shall fall under the exclusive
jurisdiction of the National Dispute Resolution Chamber of the CFA and shall be resolved
according to the applicable regulations of the CFA.”
71. The Chamber, after analysing the wording of the jurisdiction clause, conclude that such
clause was indeed clear and exclusive in favour of the Cyprus NDRC.
72. Having established the foregoing, the Chamber turned its attention to the further prerequisites for establishing the competence of a NDRC. The Chamber namely referred to
principle of equal representation of players and clubs and underlined that this principle is
one of the very fundamental elements to be fulfilled, in order for a national dispute
resolution chamber to be recognised as such. Indeed, this prerequisite is mentioned in the
Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players, in the FIFA Circular no. 1010 as well as
in art. 3 par. 1 of the NDRC Standard Regulations (Edition 2008), which illustrates the
aforementioned principle as follows: “The NDRC shall be composed of the following members,
who shall serve a four-year renewable mandate: a) a chairman and a deputy chairman chosen
by consensus by the player and club representatives (…); b) between three and ten player
representatives who are elected or appointed either on proposal of the players’ associations
affiliated to FIFPro, or, where no such associations exist, on the basis of a selection process
agreed by FIFA and FIFPro; c) between three and ten club representatives (…).” In this respect,
the FIFA Circular no. 1010 states the following: “The parties must have equal influence over
the appointment of arbitrators. This means for example that every party shall have the right to
appoint an arbitrator and the two appointed arbitrators appoint the chairman of the arbitration
tribunal (…). Where arbitrators are to be selected from a predetermined list, every interest group
that is represented must be able to exercise equal influence over the compilation of the
arbitrator list”.
73. With the aforementioned principles in mind, the Chamber we went on to examine the
documentation/information presented by the Respondent and noted that article 22.4 of
the NDRC Regulations mentioned that in case the PFA denies or neglects to appoint their
members, the nomination of arbitrators would be carried by the Pancyprian Bar
Association.
74. Having analysed the relevant wording, the Chamber considered that the above provision
was contrary to the requirements set out by Circular no. 1010. In particular, it deemed that
the inclusion of such a fallback provision for choosing members of the NDRC, and the
possibility of a third party choosing on one of the representative bodies’ behalf,
undermined the principle of equal representation of the parties and the spirit of the
applicable framework, which aims to foster a consensus between the relevant
Stakeholders.
75. Moreover, the Chamber observed that, pursuant to art. 22 par. 4 of the NDRC Regulations,
the election of the president and vice-president is carried out by the appointed members
pg. 20
REF. FPSD-15482
rather than by the Stakeholders, a provision which it considered to fall short of the
requirements set out by the Circular, applying the line of reasoning outlined above in
relation to the remaining members of the NDRC.
76. Additionally, the Chamber noted that article 22 par. 37 of the NDRC Regulations provides
for the possibility of payment in instalments, and that the proceedings in the Cyprus NDRC
are not free of charge. The Chamber hereby emphasised that, though not expressly
foreseen therein, was not collectively bargained or agreed upon, and in this context,
undermined the ratio legis of Circular no. 1010, as it could be understood to limit parties’
access to justice and to undermine the principle of equal treatment.
77. In view of the above, the Chamber concluded that it should retain jurisdiction over the
present dispute , and proceeded with its analysis.
78. 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
79. 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
80. 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
81. The Chamber then moved to the substance of the matter, and took note of the fact that
The Claimant requested payment of the outstanding remuneration and mentioned that he
terminated the Contract with just cause. The Respondent on the other hand, mentioned
that the Claimant to reject the Player’s claim.
pg. 21
REF. FPSD-15482
82. 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.
83. In view of the above, the Chamber examine each of the amounts requested.
Salaries
84. The Chamber observed that the Claimant requested the remainder of October 2023 salary
(EUR 600), April 2024 (EUR 1,000 as per the Contract and EUR 4,500 as per the Annex) and
May 2024 (EUR 1,000 as per the Contract and EUR 4,500 as per the Annex).
85. In this regard, the Chamber emphasized that the Respondent bore the burden of proof to
demonstrate that it complied with the financial obligations stipulated in the Contract.
However, the Chamber noted that the Respondent failed to provide any evidence of
payment for the balance salary due in October 2023. Furthermore, with respect to the
salaries for April and May 2024, the Chamber acknowledged that the parties concurred on
a partial payment of EUR 1,500 by the Respondent. Consequently, the Chamber concluded
that the salary for October 2023 (EUR 600) remains unpaid, and that an outstanding
balance of EUR 9,500 remains due for April and May 2024.
Rent
86. The Chamber observed that the Claimant requested the reimbursement of the payment
as housing allowance.
87. In this respect, the Chamber observed that:
-
The housing allowance was contractually agreed, however, it did not stipulate an
exact amount.
-
The Player provided a rental agreement which included a monthly rent of EUR 1,800
until May 2024.
-
The Club stated that it had paid the rent for September 2023 but did not address the
rent for April and May. Nonetheless, it fully rejected the claim.
-
The evidence provided by the Club is untranslated and the reason of payment is not
clear.
-
The Claimant provided a proof of payment of EUR 1,200 for September’s rent from
pg. 22
REF. FPSD-15482
the Respondent, but did not provide any evidence as to the payments performed to
the landlord i.e., (i) EUR 600 for September 2023, (ii) EUR 3,000 from November 2023
to March 2024; (ii) EUR 1,800 for April; and (iii) EUR 1,800 for May.
88. In view of the above, the Chamber stated that the Player failed to bure his burden in
proving that it paid such amounts namely (i) EUR 600 for September, (ii) EUR 1,800 for April;
(iii) EUR 1,800 for May, and (iv) EUR 3,000 from November 2023 to March 2024. Therefore,
the Chamber rejected this part of the Player’s claim.
Bonuses
89. The Claimant requested the payment of certain bonuses in accordance with the Contract.
In this regard, the Chamber noted that, pursuant to clause 2 of the Annex and based on
the evidence provided, the Claimant is entitled to EUR 2,500 for scoring 5 goals and EUR
3,000 for performing 8 goals and 2 assists between 18 August 2023 and November 2024.
Flight tickets
90. The Claimant requested the reimbursement of the flight ticket paid in accordance with the
Contract. In this regard, the Chamber noted that, pursuant to clause 1.5 of the Contract
and based on the evidence provided, the Claimant is entitled to EUR 565.28.
Was the disciplinary fine duly imposed on the Player?
91. The Chamber noted that the Respondent had stated a disciplinary fine had been imposed
on the Claimant and that this amount should be deducted from the Player’s salary.
92. In this respect the Chamber observed that :
-
On 9 May 2024, the President of the Club was aware of the Player’s holidays.
-
The Player informed the Club that he was leaving on 24 May 2024.
-
The Player left the country prior the termination of the contract on 24 May 2024,
one month before the end of the Contract.
-
Both parties agreed that when the player left, the league was finished.
-
The Club formally requested the Player to return on 27 May 2024 as the Contract
was still ongoing.
-
On 25 May 2024, the Player informed the Club that he would not return as
trainings finalised and that other players left too.
pg. 23
REF. FPSD-15482
-
On 29 May 2024, the Player was invited to provide his position to a disciplinary
matter which was opened against him.
-
On 30 May 2024, the Player replied to the disciplinary action mentioning that he
“objects to your letter of today's date, surprisingly entitled "Notice for Disciplinary
Procedure", in its entirety. There is absolutely no need for such a "procedure".
-
On 5 June 2024, the Disciplinary committee issued a decision in which it found
that the Claimant left without permission and fined him with EUR 500. This
decision also contained the information in which the Claimant would be able to
appeal it within 3 days.
93. In continuation, the Chamber recalled the wording of clause 10 of the Standard Contract
according to which “[t]he Player is entitled to 24 days of paid leave for every employment period
of 48 weeks, or, in case of shorter employment the corresponding proportion. If the requested
leave falls within the paying season, it will be subject to the approval of the Club.”
94. In light of the above considerations, the Chamber determined that the Player was entitled
to take holidays in accordance with Clause 10 of the Standard Contract. Given that the
league had concluded, no formal permission was required. Furthermore, the President had
already acknowledged in a WhatsApp message that the Player could go on holiday.
Therefore, the Chamber concluded that initiating disciplinary proceedings against the
Player was not justified and thus no deduction as to the Player’s salary was possible.
ii. Consequences
95. Having stated the above, and in accordance with the general legal principle of pacta sunt
servanda, the Chamber decided that the Respondent is liable to pay to the Claimant the
EUR 16,165.28.
96. 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 the outstanding amounts as follows:
-
On the amount of EUR 600 as from 21 November 2023 until the date of effective
payment;
-
On the amount of EUR 4,500 as from 21 May 2024 until the date of effective payment;
-
On the amount of EUR 5,000 as from 21 June 2024 until the date of effective payment;
-
On the amount of EUR 5,500 as from 1 July 2024 until the date of effective payment;
-
On the amount of EUR 565.28 as from 1 July 2024 until the date of effective payment.
pg. 24
REF. FPSD-15482
iii. Compliance with monetary decisions
97. 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.
98. 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.
99. 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.
100. 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.
101. 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
102. 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.
103. 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.
104. Lastly, the DRC concluded its deliberations by rejecting any other requests for relief made
by any of the parties.
pg. 25
REF. FPSD-15482
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The Football Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear the claim of the claimant, Karim Rossi.
2.
The claim of the Claimant, Karim Rossi, is partially accepted.
3.
The Respondent, KARMIOTISSA POLEMIDION, must pay to the Claimant the following
amount(s):
- EUR 600 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 21 November 2023
until the date of effective payment;
- EUR 4,500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 21 May 2024 until
the date of effective payment;
- EUR 5,000 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 21 June 2024 until
the date of effective payment;
- EUR 5,500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 July 2024 until
the date of effective payment;
- EUR 565.28 as outstanding amount plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 July 2024 until the
date of effective payment;
4.
Any further claims of the Claimant 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 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 in accordance
with art. 24 par. 7 and 8 and art. 25 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players.
pg. 26
REF. FPSD-15482
8.
This decision is rendered without costs.
For the Football Tribunal:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
pg. 27
REF. FPSD-15482
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. 28