Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF 20-01481
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 10 December 2020,
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the player Myroslav Slavov
COMPOSITION:
Geoff Thompson (England), Chairman
Angela Collins (Australia), member
Aby Nayeem Shohag (Bangladesh), member
CLAIMANT:
MYROSLAV SLAVOV, Ukraine
RESPONDENT:
SHAHR KHODROU, IR Iran
Haga clic o pulse aquí para escribir texto.
Page 2 of 9
REF 20-01481
I. FACTS
1.
On 23 January 2020, the player and the club signed a contract, valid for “two years and half”,
according to which the player was entitled to receive the following amounts:
Season 2019/2020 the total amount of USD 100,000:
- USD 50,000, payable when “the contract is concluded”;
- USD 50,000, payable in 5 monthly instalments “at the end of twenty-eight day of each
month”.
Season 2020/2021 the total amount of USD 150,000:
- USD 50,000, payable at “the beginning of the season 2020-2021”;
- USD 10,000, payable “monthly up to the contract” “at the end of twenty-eight day of
each month”.
Season 2021/2022 the total amount of USD 200,000:
- USD 100,000, payable at “the beginning of the season “2021-2020”;
- USD 10,000, payable “during ten months up to the contract” “at the end of twenty-eight
day of each month”.
Furthermore, the contract provides for a bonus of USD 10,000 in case of qualification for the
Asian Champions League, “except play off”.
2.
On 14 March 2020, the club gave the player “written permission to fly home to Vienna due to
league closure and Persian New Year holiday”.
3.
Moreover, on 15 March 2020, the player signed a document that was handed over to him by the
club on the airport, when he was about to fly home, in which the player declared that the club
offered him an apartment that “didn’t suit his taste” and that the club will pay the delayed salaries
until 24 April 2020.
4.
On 2 June 2020, the agent of the player put the club in default for the outstanding amounts due
under the contract, as well as the costs for a visa and flight ticket.
5.
On 6 June 2020, the club replied that the player would receive all his dues when he would arrive
in Iran and also sent the player a flight ticket. As result, the player arrived on 18 June 2020 in Iran,
however no one from the club was waiting.
6.
In view of the foregoing, on 21 June 2020, the player unilaterally terminated the contract due the
outstanding amounts and lack of communication from the club’s side.
7.
On 8 October 2020, the player lodged a claim against the club, claiming the payment of
outstanding remuneration and compensation or breach of contract, specified as follows:
Outstanding remuneration:
USD 50,000, corresponding to the outstanding salaries in the period between February
and June 2020.
Compensation for breach of contract:
USD 350,000 as remaining value of the contract in the 2020/2021 and 2021/2022
seasons;
Page 3 of 9
REF 20-01481
USD 10,000 as bonus for the qualification for the group stage of the AFC Champions
League 2020.
8.
In his claim, the player explains that the club failed to make any of the payments due under the
contract, as well as that the club, on 14 March 2020, gave him “written permission to fly home
to Vienna due to league closure and Persian New Year holiday”.
9.
After arriving again in Iran on 18 June 2020, the club did not show longer any interest in his
services and also failed to pay him the outstanding amounts due under the contract.
10. Despite having been invited to do so, the club failed to answer to the player’s claim.
11. The player informed that FIFA Administration that after the unilateral termination of the contract,
he remained unemployed.
II. CONSIDERATIONS OF THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION CHAMBER
1. 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 submitted to FIFA on 10 October 2020. Taking into account the wording
of art. 21 of the 2020 edition of the Rules Governing the Procedures of the Players’ Status
Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: the Procedural Rules), the
aforementioned edition of the Procedural Rules is applicable to the matter at hand.
2.
Subsequently, the members of the Chamber referred to art. 3 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules and
confirmed that in accordance with art. 24 par. 1 in combination with art. 22 lit. b) of the
Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (edition October 2020), the Dispute Resolution
Chamber is competent to deal with the matter at stake. The matter concerns an employmentrelated dispute with an international dimension between a Ukrainian player and an Iranian club,
and the competence is not disputed by the parties.
3.
In continuation, the Chamber analysed which regulations should be applicable as to the substance
of the matter. In this respect, the DRC confirmed that in accordance with art. 26 par. 1 and 2 of
the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (October 2020 edition), and considering that
the claim was lodged on 8 October 2020, the October 2020 edition of the aforementioned
regulations (hereinafter: the Regulations) is applicable to the matter at hand as to the substance.
4.
The competence of the Chamber and the applicable regulations having been established, the
Chamber entered into the substance of the matter. In this respect, the Chamber started by
acknowledging all the above-mentioned facts as well as the arguments and the documentation
submitted by the parties. 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.
5.
In continuation, the members of the Chamber noted that the player lodged a claim against the
club, maintaining that he had terminated the employment contract with just cause on 21 June
Page 4 of 9
REF 20-01481
2020, after previously having put the club in default, since the club allegedly failed to pay the
player’s remuneration. In this respect, the player further explained that he got permission to fly
home (Vienna, Austria) after the closure of the league in Iran on 14 March 2020 and that he
received, after having sent his default letter, from the club a flight ticket to fly back to Iran on 18
June 2020. However, since on 18 June 2020 no one of the club showed up to take care and
because of the fact that he still had not received his outstanding remuneration, the player
unilaterally terminated the contract on 21 June 2020. Consequently, the player asks to be
awarded his outstanding dues as well as the payment of compensation for breach of the
employment contract.
6.
The club, for its part, failed to present its response to the claim of the player, in spite of having
been invited to do so. Consequently, the Chamber deemed that the club had renounced to its
right of defence and, thus, had accepted the allegations of the player.
7.
As a consequence of the aforementioned consideration, the members of the Chamber concurred
that, in accordance with art. 9 par. 3 of the Procedural Rules, a decision shall be taken upon the
basis of the documents already on file, in other words, upon the statements and documents
presented by the player.
8.
In accordance with the employment contract, the club - in addition to the sign-on fee of USD
50,000 that was allegedly paid - was obliged to pay to the player at the time the contract was
terminated by the player, i.e. on 21 June 2020, the amount of EUR 50,000, corresponding to the
five monthly salaries for the period between February and June 2020.
9.
On account of the aforementioned, in particular in view of the considerations under point II./7.
and II./8. above, the Chamber established that the club, without any valid reason, failed to remit
to the player, until 21 June 2020, the date on which the player terminated the contract, the total
amount of EUR 50,000. What is more, the Chamber wished to point out that the club did not
communicate any further with the player, once he returned from Austria to Iran.
10. Consequently, and considering that the club had repeatedly and for a significant period of time
been in breach of its contractual obligations towards the player and did not show sincere interest
in him after his return to Iran, the Chamber decided that the player had just cause to unilaterally
terminate the employment contract on 21 June 2020 and that, as a result, the club is to be held
liable for the early termination of the employment contact with just cause by the player.
11. In continuation, having established that the club is to be held liable for the early termination of
the employment contract with just cause by the player, the Chamber focused its attention on the
consequences of such termination. In this regard, the members of the Chamber determined that
the club was not only to pay the amount of EUR 50,000 as outstanding remuneration to the
player, but also to pay compensation for breach of contract in conformity with art. 17 par. 1 of
the Regulations.
12. 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 members of 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
Page 5 of 9
REF 20-01481
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.
13. 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 established that no such
compensation clause was included in the employment contract at the basis of the matter at stake.
14. 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
15. Bearing in mind the foregoing as well as the claim of the player, the Chamber proceeded with the
calculation of the monies payable to the player under the terms of the employment contract until
the end of the season 2021/2022. Consequently, the Chamber concluded that the amount of
EUR 350,000 (i.e. the remuneration for the season 2020/2021 and 2021/2022) serves as the basis
for the determination of the amount of compensation for breach of contract. In this respect, the
Chamber pointed out that with regard to the bonus claimed by the player for the qualification for
the group stage of the AFC Champions League 2020, said bonus payment could not be taken
into account, as the player did not submit any evidence in relation to this part of the claim.
16. 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, 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.
17. In this respect, the Chamber noted that the player informed the FIFA Administration that after the
unilateral termination of the contract, he remained unemployed. As a result, no amounts were to
be mitigated from the compensation awarded to the player.
18. 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 EUR 350,000 to
the player, i.e. the residual value of the contract, which was to be considered a reasonable and
justified amount of compensation for breach of contract in the present matter.
19. In conclusion, for all the above reasons, the Chamber decided to partially accept the player’s claim
and that the club must pay to the player the amount of EUR 50,000 as outstanding remuneration
and EUR 350,000 as compensation for breach of contract.
20. Furthermore, taking into account the consideration under number II./3. above, the Chamber
referred to par. 1 and 2 of art. 24bis of the Regulations, which stipulate that, with its decision,
Page 6 of 9
REF 20-01481
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.
21. In this regard, the Chamber pointed out 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 and for the maximum duration of
three entire and consecutive registration periods.
22. Therefore, bearing in mind the above, the DRC decided that, in the event that the club does not
pay the amounts due to the player within 45 days as from the moment in which the player,
following the notification of the present decision, communicates the relevant bank details to the
club, a ban from registering any new players, either nationally or internationally, for the maximum
duration of three entire and consecutive registration periods shall become effective on the club in
accordance with art. 24bis par. 2 and 4 of the Regulations.
23. Finally, the Chamber 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. 24bis par. 3
of the Regulations.
Page 7 of 9
REF 20-01481
III. DECISION OF THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION CHAMBER
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Myroslav Slavov, is partially accepted.
2.
The Respondent has to pay to the Claimant the following amounts:
- USD 50,000 as outstanding remuneration.
- USD 350,000 as compensation for breach of contract without just cause.
3.
Any further claim lodged by the Claimant is rejected.
4.
The Claimant is directed to immediately and directly inform the Respondent of the relevant bank
account to which the Respondent must pay the due amount.
5.
The Respondent shall provide evidence of payment of the due amount in accordance with this
decision to [email protected], duly translated, if applicable, into one of the official FIFA languages
(English, French, German, Spanish).
6.
In the event that the amount due, plus interest as established above is not paid by the Respondent
within 45 days, as from the notification by the of the relevant bank details to the Respondent,
the following consequences shall arise:
1. The Respondent shall be banned from registering any new players, either nationally or
internationally, up until the due amount is paid and for the maximum duration of three
entire and consecutive registration periods. The aforementioned ban mentioned will be
lifted immediately and prior to its complete serving, once the due amount is paid.
(cf. art. 24bis of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players).
2. In the event that the payable amount as per in this decision is still not paid by the end of
the ban of three entire and consecutive registration periods, the present matter shall be
submitted, upon request, to the FIFA Disciplinary Committee.
For the Dispute Resolution Chamber:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
Page 8 of 9
REF 20-01481
NOTE RELATED TO THE APPEAL PROCEDURE:
According to article 58 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 20 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 9 of 9