Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF. FPSD-15080
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 2 October 2024
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the player Aniagyei
Stanley Ampaw
BY:
Calum BEATTIE (Scotland)
CLAIMANT:
Aniagyei Stanley Ampaw, Ghana
RESPONDENT:
Etoile Sportive Du Sahel, Tunisia
pg. 2
REF. FPSD-15080
I. Facts of the case
1.
On 30 August 2021, the Ghanian player, Aniagyei Stanley Ampaw (hereinafter: the Player or
the Claimant), and the Tunisian club, Etoile Sportive Du Sahel (hereinafter: the Club or the
Respondent) entered into an employment contract (hereinafter: the Contract) valid as from
12 August 2021 until 30 June 2022.
2.
In accordance with the Contract, the Respondent undertook to pay to the Claimant inter
alia the following amounts:
•
•
•
3.
Advancement payment: USD 3,000
Monthly salary: USD 1,000
Annual performance bonus: USD 12,000 per year; “the performance bonus will be
paid in 4 instalments, the 1st instalment will be paid at the start of each season, the three
instalments will be paid each quarter according to the FTF regulations.” (i.e. Fédération
Tunisien de Football)
By correspondence dated 4 January 2022, the Claimant put the Respondent in default for
the payments of the following amounts without giving any deadline to the Respondent:
•
•
•
•
•
TND 9,372 for the outstanding sign-on fee due on 14 September 2021;
TND 1,562 for the outstanding balance of September salary due on 1 October 2021;
TND 3,124 for the outstanding salary of January due on 1 February 2022;
TND 37,488 for the outstanding performance bonus due in June 2022;
TND 3,000 as ES Zarzis match win bonus due on 17 March 2022.
4.
On 26 June 2023, the Claimant sent an email to the CAF Disciplinary Committee, putting the
Club in copy, stating that the Player had put the Club in default on 4 January 2022.The
Player requested CAF to investigate the matter and take the appropriate measures against
the Club.
5.
On 8 August 2023, CAF advised the Player to submit this case to the relevant competent
authorities, including FIFA.
II. Proceedings before FIFA
6.
On 30 June 2024, the Claimant filed the claim at hand before FIFA. A summary of the parties’
position is detailed below.
a. Position of the Claimant
7.
The requests for relief of the Claimant, were the following:
pg. 3
REF. FPSD-15080
“Declare that the claim is admissible on the grounds that the statue of limitations has been
suspended due to continuous procedural engagement and indirect acknowledgment of debt by
the defendant debtor club, in compliance with art. 23(3) of the FIFA Regulations on the Status
and Transfer of Players (RSTP) and relevant CAF Licensing Regulations.
Order the defendant to pay the following outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest from the
respective due dates until the date of full payment:
•
•
•
•
•
TND 9,372: Outstanding signing fee originally due on September 14, 2021;
TND 1,562: Remaining balance of the salary for September, due on October 1,
2021;
TND 3,124: Overdue salary for January, due on February 1, 2022;
TND 37,4888: Performance bonus due in June 2022;
TND 3,000: ES Zarzis match won bonus, due on March 17, 2022.
Request the imposition of appropriate sanctions against the defendant in accordance with arts.
12 bis and 24 bis of the FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players.”
8.
Regarding the first paragraph of the request for relief, the Player explained that the indirect
acknowledgement of the debt from the Club has interrupted the status of limitations. In
particular, the Claimant alleged the following:
•
“Continuous procedural engagement and indirect acknowledgment of debt by the
Respondent, including their acquisition of a CAF license for 2023 despite not settling their
financial obligations, support the suspension of the statute of limitations. The formal
notices and interactions with CAF and FTF effectively interrupted the statute of
limitations, making the claim lodged on June 30, 2024, admissible. Thus, the claim for
the following amounts remains within the permissible timeframe[...]”.
•
“The Respondent’s acquisition of a CAF license for 2023 implicitly acknowledged its debt
obligations. Article 60 of the CAF Licensing Regulations requires clubs to prove by March
31 that they have no overdue payables to be eligible for licensing. This declaration is an
indirect acknowledgment of their debts[...]”.
•
“The Respondent’s acquisition of a CAF license for 2023 implicitly acknowledged its debt
obligations. Article 60 of the CAF Licensing Regulations requires clubs to prove by March
31 that they have no overdue payables to be eligible for licensing. This declaration is an
indirect acknowledgment of their debts."
b. Position of the Respondent
9.
Despite being invited to do so, the Respondent did not reply to the claim.
pg. 4
REF. FPSD-15080
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
10. First of all, the Single Judge of the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: the Single Judge)
analysed whether he was competent to deal with the case at hand. In this respect, he took
note that the present matter was presented to FIFA on 30 June 2024 and submitted for
decision on 2 October 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.
11. Furthermore, the Single Judge 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 (June 2024 edition), the Single Judge is
competent to deal with the matter at stake, which concerns an employment-related
dispute with an international dimension between a Ghanaian player and a Tunisian club.
12. Subsequently, the Single Judge analysed which regulations should be applicable as to the
substance of the matter. In this respect, he confirmed that, in accordance with art. 26 par.
1 and 2 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (June 2024 edition) and
considering that the present claim was lodged on 30 June 2024, the June 2024 edition of
said regulations (hereinafter: the Regulations) is applicable to the matter at hand as to the
substance.
b. Admissibility
13. At this point, the Single Judge referred to art. 23 par. 3 of the Regulations, which stipulates
that the decision-making bodies of FIFA shall not hear any dispute if more than two years
have elapsed since the facts leading to the dispute arose. The application of this limit shall
be examined ex officio in each individual case.
14. In this context, the Single Judge recalled that the present claim was lodged in front of FIFA
on 30 June 2024. Therefore, in line with art. 23 par. 2 of the Regulations any amount fallen
due before 30 June 2022 are affected by the statute of limitations.
15. The Single Judge noted that, in the present case, the Claimant requested the following
payments:
•
•
•
•
The outstanding signing fee due on 14 September 2021;
The remaining balance of the salary of September 2021;
The salary of January 2022;
The winning bonus due on 17 March 2022;
pg. 5
REF. FPSD-15080
•
The Performance bonus due in June 2022.
16. The Single Judge took note of the Player’s allegations regarding the suspension of the status
of limitations. Specifically, the Player explained that by acquiring the CAF license for 2023,
the Club indirectly acknowledged their debt towards the Player. However, the Single Judge
noted that art. 60 of the CAF Licensing Regulations states that the Clubs should prove that
they have no overdue payables towards their employees. Therefore, as the Club
successfully obtained its 2023 license, as pointed out by the Player, it is evident that the
Club declared it has no overdue payables. This directly contradicts the Player’s allegations.
17. In this regard, the Single Judge noticed that there is no evidence on file showing that the
Club has indirectly acknowledged their debt towards the Player.
18. The Single Judge concluded that the status of limitations has not been suspended and the
Claimant’s requests for remuneration due before June are time-barred. Consequently, the
Claimant’s claim related to the following payments is considered inadmissible, since they
all became due before 30 June 2022:
•
•
•
•
The outstanding signing fee due on 14 September 2021;
The remaining balance of the salary of September 2021;
The salary of January 2022; and
The winning bonus due on 17 March 2022.
19. In view of the foregoing, the Single Judge determined that his task was to determine when
the Performance bonus requested was due.
20. The Single Judge reverted to the Contract, which was valid from 12 August 2021 until 30
June 2022, and took note that the Player argued that the performance bonus of USD 12,000
was due in June 2022.
21. According to the Contract, the annual performance bonus would be paid as follows: “USD
12,000 per year; “the performance bonus will be paid in 4 instalments, the 1st instalment will be
paid at the start of each season, the three instalments will be paid each quarter according to
the FTF regulations.”
22. The Single Judge observed that the FTF Regulations provided by the Player do not support
his allegations regarding the due date of the bonus. In particular, according to section 2 of
annex 1 of said regulations, the bonus is paid at the end of every trimester of the season.
23. Such provision is supported by the relevant clause of the Contract stating that the
performance bonus was to be paid in 4 instalments, i.e. in every trimester of the season.
Therefore, the Single Judge noticed that part of the performance bonus is time-barred as
it was due before June 2022 and more than two years have elapsed since the due dates.
pg. 6
REF. FPSD-15080
24. The Single Judge considered that the fourth instalment of the bonus was due at the end of
the last trimester of the season, i.e. end of June 2022.
25. Consequently, based on the above, the Single Judge decided that the fourth instalment of
the bonus of the amount of USD 3,000 was to be paid by the end of June 2022 and
therefore, considering the claim was lodged on 30 June, this part of the Claimant’s request
is admissible.
c. Burden of proof
26. 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, the Single Judge
stressed the wording of art. 13 par. 4 of the Procedural Rules, pursuant to which he may
consider evidence not filed by the parties, including without limitation the evidence
generated by or within the Transfer Matching System (TMS).
d. Merits of the dispute
27. Having established the admissibility, the competence and the applicable regulations, the
Single Judge entered into the merits of the dispute. In this respect, the Single Judge started
by acknowledging all the above-mentioned facts as well as the arguments and the
documentation on file. However, the Single Judge emphasised that in the following
considerations he will refer only to the facts, arguments and documentary evidence, which
he considered pertinent for assessing the matter at hand.
i. Main legal discussion and considerations
28. At this point, the Single Judge recalled that the analysis on the substance of the dispute is
limited to the fourth instalment of the performance bonus only.
29. The Single Judge also recalled that the Respondent failed to reply to the claim and
therefore, it remained uncontested that the fourth instalment of the performance bonus
remained outstanding.
30. Consequently, based on the above, the Single Judge decided that the fourth instalment of
the bonus of the amount of USD 3,000 due in June 2022 shall be awarded to the Player, i.e.
USD 12,000/4.
pg. 7
REF. FPSD-15080
ii. Consequences
31. As a consequence, and in accordance with the general legal principle of pacta sunt servanda,
the Single Judge decided that the Respondent is liable to pay to the Claimant the amount
of USD 3,000 corresponding to the fourth instalment of the Performance bonus which was
outstanding under the contract at the moment of the termination.
32. In addition, taking into consideration the Claimant’s request as well as the constant practice
of the Single Judge in this regard, the latter decided to award the Claimant interest at the
rate of 5% p.a. on the outstanding amounts as from 1 July 2022 until the date of effective
payment.
iii. Application of art. 12 bis
33. In continuation, the Single Judge referred to art. 12 bis par. 2 of the Regulations, which
stipulates that any club found to have a due payment for more than 30 days without a
prima facie contractual basis may be sanctioned in accordance with art. 12 bis par. 4 of the
Regulations.
34. To this end, the Single Judge observed that on 4 January 2022, the Player put the
Respondent in default. However, such notice did not comply with the formal requirements
of art. 12 bis of the Regulations as no deadline was given to the Club to comply with their
default.
35. Consequently, the Single Judge determined that art. 12 bis of the Regulations does not
apply in the present case.
iv. Compliance with monetary decisions
36. 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 in due time.
37. 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.
38. 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
pg. 8
REF. FPSD-15080
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.
39. 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.
40. 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.
e. Costs
41. 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 Single Judge decided that no procedural costs were to be
imposed on the parties.
42. 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.
43. Lastly, the Single Judge concluded its deliberations by rejecting any other requests for relief
made by any of the parties.
pg. 9
REF. FPSD-15080
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Aniagyei Stanley Ampaw, is accepted insofar it is admissible.
2.
The Respondent, Etoile Sportive Du Sahel, must pay to the Claimant the following
amount(s):
- USD 3,000 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 July 2022 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-15080
NOTE RELATED TO THE APPEAL PROCEDURE:
According to article 57 par. 1 of the FIFA Statutes, this decision may be appealed against before
the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) within 21 days of receipt of the notification of this
decision.
NOTE RELATED TO THE PUBLICATION:
FIFA may publish this decision. For reasons of confidentiality, FIFA may decide, at the request
of a party within five days of the notification of the motivated decision, to publish an
anonymised or a redacted version (cf. article 17 of the Procedural Rules Governing the Football
Tribunal).
CONTACT INFORMATION
Fédération Internationale de Football Association – Legal & Compliance Division
396 Alhambra Circle, 6th floor, Coral Gables, Miami, Florida, USA 33134
legal.fifa.com | [email protected] | T: +41 (0)43 222 7777
pg. 11