Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF. FPSD-13359
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 17 February 2024
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning
the player Tresor Shaka
BY:
Stella MARIS JUNCOS, Argentina
CLAIMANT:
Tresor Shaka, Burundi
Represented by FIFPRO Africa
RESPONDENT:
Mbarara City FC, Uganda
pg. 2
REF. FPSD-13359
I.
Facts of the case
1.
On 1 June 2023, the player Tresor Shaka from Burundi (hereinafter: Claimant or player) and the club
Mbarara City FC from Uganda (hereinafter: Respondent or club) concluded an employment contract
(hereinafter: contract) valid as from the same date until 30 June 2025.
2.
According to the contract, the club undertook to pay to the player:
a. UGX 14,000,000 as a sign-on fee.
b. UGX 650,000 as monthly salary.
3.
On 30 December 2023, the player put the club in default for payment of his salaries regarding the
months of September, October, and November 2023, as well as for a part of the sign-on for UGX
11,000,000, requesting the club to make the payment within 10 days.
4.
On an unspecified date, in reply to the default notice, the club stated that the player “never tried” in
October and November and had missed training in December 2023.
5.
On 3 January 2024, the player rejected the allegations of the club, stating he had always been at the
disposal of the club and insisting he complied with the contract. He reiterated the deadline
previously given to the club to pay the outstanding payments, otherwise he would terminate the
contract on the grounds of art. 14 of the FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players
(RSTP).
6.
On 11 January 2024, the player terminated the employment contract invoking just cause.
7.
On 18 January 2024, the player signed an employment contract with the club Bumamuru FC from
Burundi valid for 6 months. Under said agreement, the player was entitled to (a) a monthly salary of
BIF 400,000 (approx. UGX 526,000) plus (b) an annual salary of BIF 400,000 plus (c) a sign-on fee of
BIF 2,000,000 (approx. UGX 2,635,000).
II. Proceedings before FIFA
8.
On 15 January 2024, the Claimant filed the claim at hand before FIFA. A brief summary of the position
of the parties is detailed in continuation.
a. Claim of the Claimant
9.
In his claim, the player advanced the following arguments.
Termination with just cause:
10. The player terminated the contract with just cause on 11 January 2024, on the grounds of the club’s
abusive behaviour and failure to pay the full salaries for 4 months, as well as a significant part of the
signing fee. The player referred in this respect to art. 14 of the RSTP, which he stressed allows for
the termination of a contract without consequences when there is just cause.
pg. 3
REF. FPSD-13359
Outstanding salaries:
11. The player requested UGX 13,600,000 as outstanding remuneration, including the unpaid salaries
for September, October, November, and December 2023, as well as the outstanding part of the signon fee of UGX 11,000,000. The player also claimed 5% interest on the said amounts from the relevant
due dates.
Compensation for breach of contract:
12. The player contended that club is liable to pay compensation for breach of contract, as per art. 17
of the RSTP. He submitted in this respect that the remaining value of the contract, corresponds to
UGX 11,700,000, which shall be awarded to him as compensation, along with 5% interest from the
date of termination until the date of effective payment.
Request for Relief:
13. The player requested FIFA to determine that he terminated the employment relationship with the
club with just cause and to order the club to pay the outstanding amounts for salaries and
compensation for breach of contract, along with 5% interest per annum, as specified above. The
player additionally requested FIFA to impose sporting sanctions on the club for the breach of
contract within the protected period.
b. Position of the Respondent
14. On 16 January 2024, the FIFA general secretariat invited the club to submit its position as to the
player’s claim by 5 February 2024.
15. Having received no correspondence from the club within the cited date, on 6 February 2024, the
FIFA general secretariat closed the submission phase of the proceedings in line with art. 23 par. 1
of the Procedural Rules Governing the Football Tribunal.
16. On 12 February 2024, the FIFA general secretariat informed the parties that the case would be
submitted for consideration and decision by the Singe Judge of the Dispute Resolution Chamber on
17 February 2024.
17. On 19 February 2024, the findings of the decision of the Singe Judge of the Dispute Resolution
Chamber were notified to the parties.
18. On the same date, the Respondent filed a short reply brief as to the claim of the player, along with
evidence.
19. On the same date, the FIFA general secretariat informed the parties inter alia as follows:
“Dear Madam or Sir,
We refer to the above-captioned matter and to our in particular to our correspondence of 6 February
2024, by means of which we informed you that the submission phase in the matter at hand was closed.
pg. 4
REF. FPSD-13359
In this regard, we are in receipt of the correspondence filed with our services by the Respondent in
reply thereto, a copy of which is available in the FIFA Legal Portal.
Accordingly, we revert to art. 23 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules Governing the Football Tribunal, in
accordance with which the parties may not supplement or amend their submissions or requests for
relief or produce new evidence after notification of the closure of the submission phase.
Consequently, please note that the aforementioned correspondence is disregarded.”
20. On 28 February 2024, the club requested the grounds of the decision of the Single Judge of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber.
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
21. First of all, the Single Judge of the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter also referred to as Single
Judge) analysed whether she was competent to deal with the case at hand. In this respect, she took
note that the present matter was presented to FIFA on 15 January 2024 and submitted for decision
on 17 February 2024. Taking into account the wording of art. 34 of the March 2023 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.
22. Furthermore, the Single Judge referred to art. 2 par. 1 and art. 24 par. 1 lit. a) 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
RSTP (May 2023 edition), she is competent to deal with the matter at stake, which concerns an
employment-related dispute with an international dimension between a player from Burundi and a
club from Uganda.
23. Subsequently, the Single Judge analysed which regulations should be applicable as to the substance
of the matter. In this respect, she confirmed that, in accordance with art. 26 par. 1 and 2 of the RSTP
(May 2023 edition), and considering that the present claim was lodged on 15 January 2024, said
edition of the RSTP (hereinafter: the Regulations) is applicable to the matter at hand as to the
substance.
b. Burden of proof
24. The Single Judge 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, she stressed the wording of art. 13 par. 4 of the
Procedural Rules, pursuant to which she may consider evidence not filed by the parties, including
without limitation the evidence generated by or within the Transfer Matching System (TMS).
pg. 5
REF. FPSD-13359
c.
Merits of the dispute
25. The competence and the applicable regulations having been established, the Single Judge entered
into the merits of the dispute. In this respect, she started by acknowledging all the above-mentioned
facts as well as the arguments and the documentation on file. However, she emphasised that in the
following considerations she will refer only to the facts, arguments and documentary evidence,
which she considered pertinent for the assessment of the matter at hand.
i. Main legal discussion and considerations
26. The foregoing having been established, the Single Judge moved to the substance of the matter and
took note of the fact that this is a claim of the player against the club for breach of contract, in which
no valid reply was filed by the latter.
27. In fact, the Single Judge confirmed the FIFA general secretariat was correct with regard to the late
reply filed by the club: as the submission-phase of the proceedings had already been closed, the
parties were not authorized to file additional submissions or present new evidence in line with art.
23, par. 1 of the Procedural Rules. Accordingly, the Single Judge considered that the club has
renounced its right to present its position and therefore she shall analyse the matter at hand on the
basis of the allegations and evidence brought forward by the player alone in accordance with art.
14 of the Procedural Rules.
28. In this context, the Single Judge acknowledged that was her task to determine if the player had had
just cause to terminate the contract and the ensuing consequences. She accordingly took note of
the fact that the player claims not having received his remuneration corresponding to September,
October, and November 2023, as well as a significant part of the sign-on fee. Furthermore, the player
has provided written evidence of having put the club in default on 30 December 2023, before
unilaterally terminating the contract on 11 January 2024.
29. The Single Jude furthermore noted that in the case at hand the club bore the burden of proving that
it indeed complied with the financial terms of the contract concluded between the parties.
Nonetheless, no reply has been filed, and the claim stood uncontested.
30. Consequently, on account of the above, the Single Judge was satisfied that the club had repeatedly
and for a significant period been in breach of its contractual obligations towards the player. She
decided thus that the player had just cause to unilaterally terminate the contract based on art. 14
of the Regulations and that, as a result, the club is to be held liable for the early termination of the
contract with just cause by the player.
ii. Consequences
31. Having stated the above, the Single Judge turned her attention to the question of the consequences
of such unjustified breach of contract committed by the club. She observed that the outstanding
remuneration at the time of termination, coupled with the specific requests for relief of the player,
correspond to the following:
a.
b.
UGX 11,000,000 as unpaid portion of the sign-on fee.
UGX 650,000 as salary of September 2023.
pg. 6
REF. FPSD-13359
c.
d.
e.
UGX 650,000 as salary of October 2023.
UGX 650,000 as salary of November 2023.
UGX 650,000 as salary of December 2023.
32. As a consequence, and in accordance with the general legal principle of pacta sunt servanda, the
Single Judge 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 as outlined above. In addition, taking into
consideration the player’s request as well as the constant practice of the Football Tribunal in this
regard, the Single Judge decided to award him interest at the rate of 5% p.a. on the outstanding
amounts as from their respective due dates until the date of effective payment.
33. Having stated the above, the Single Judge 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 Single Judge 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.
34. In application of the relevant provision, the Single Judge held that it first of all had to clarify as to
whether the 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 Single Judge established that no such compensation clause was included
in the employment contract at the basis of the matter at stake. As a consequence, she 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. She additionally recalled that
said provision provides for a non-exhaustive enumeration of criteria to be taken into consideration
when calculating the amount of compensation payable.
35. Bearing in mind the foregoing as well as the claim of the player, the Single Judge proceeded with the
calculation of the monies payable to the player under the terms of the contract from the date of its
unilateral termination until its end date. Consequently, she concluded that the amount of UGX
11,700,000 (i.e., the residual value of the contract for 18 months) serves as the basis for the
determination of the amount of compensation for breach of contract.
36. In continuation, the Single Judge 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 Football
Tribunal 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.
37. Indeed, the player found new employment. In accordance with the pertinent employment contract,
the player was entitled to approximately to an annual payment of BIF 400,000 (approx. UGX 526,000)
plus a monthly salary of BIF 400,000 (approx. UGX 526,000) plus a sign-on fee of BIF 2,000,000
(approx. UGX 2,635,000). Therefore, the Single Judge concluded that the player mitigated his
pg. 7
REF. FPSD-13359
damages in the total amount of UGX 6,054,000, that is, half an annual salary (since the duration of
his new employment was of six months), plus 6 salaries of UGX 526,000 each, plus UGX 2,635,000
as sign-on fee.
38. Subsequently, the Single Judge referred to art. 17 par. 1 lit. ii) of the Regulations, according to which
a player is entitled to an amount corresponding to three monthly salaries as additional
compensation should the termination of the employment contract at stake be due to overdue
payables. In the case at hand, the Single Judge confirmed that the contract termination took place
due to said reason i.e., overdue payables by the club, and therefore decided that the player shall
receive additional compensation. In this respect, the Single Judge decided to award the amount of
additional compensation of UGX 1,950,000, i.e. three times the monthly remuneration of the player
(UGX 650,000).
39. Consequently, on account of all of the above-mentioned considerations and the specificities of the
case at hand, the Single Judge decided that the club must pay the amount of UGX 7,596,000 to the
player (i.e., UGX 11,700,000 minus UGX 6,054,000 plus UGX 1,950,000), which was considered a
reasonable and justified amount of compensation for breach of contract in the present matter.
40. Lastly, taking into consideration the player’s request as well as the constant practice of the Football
Tribunal in this regard, the Single Judge decided to award the player interest on said compensation
at the rate of 5% p.a. as of 11 January 2024 until the date of effective payment.
iii. Compliance with monetary decisions
41. Finally, taking into account the applicable Regulations, the Single Judge 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.
42. In this regard, the Single Judge 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.
43. Therefore, bearing in mind the above, the Single Judge 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.
44. 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.
45. The Single Judge 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.
pg. 8
REF. FPSD-13359
d. Costs
46. The Single Judge 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.
47. Likewise, and for the sake of completeness, the Single Judge recalled the contents of art. 25 par. 8
of the Procedural Rules, and decided that no procedural compensation shall be awarded in these
proceedings.
48. Lastly, the Single Judge concluded the deliberations by rejecting any other requests for relief made
by any of the parties.
pg. 9
REF. FPSD-13359
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Tresor Shaka, is partially accepted.
2.
The Respondent, Mbarara City FC, must pay to the Claimant the following amount(s):
a. UGX 11,000,000 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 July 2023 until
the date of effective payment;
b. UGX 650,000 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 October 2023 until
the date of effective payment;
c. UGX 650,000 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 November 2023
until the date of effective payment;
d. UGX 650,000 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 December 2023
until the date of effective payment;
e. UGX 650,000 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 January 2024 until
the date of effective payment;
f. UGX 7,596,000 as compensation for breach of contract without just cause plus 5% interest
p.a. as from 11 January 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. 10
REF. FPSD-13359
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
FIFA-Strasse 20 P.O. Box 8044 Zurich Switzerland
www.fifa.com | legal.fifa.com | [email protected] | T: +41 (0)43 222 7777
pg. 11