DRC Overdue Payables
Texto da decisão
REF FPSD-3191
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 27 October 2021
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the player Sciprim
Taipi
BY:
Jon Newman (USA)
CLAIMANT:
Sciprim Taipi, Serbia
Represented by Arsen Selmanaj
RESPONDENT:
SK Skenderbeu Korce, Albania
Page 2
REF FPSD-3191
I.
Facts of the case
1.
On 18 January 2019, the Serbian player, Sciprim Taipi (hereinafter: the player or the Claimant),
and the Albanian club, SK Skenderbeu Korce (hereinafter: the club or the Respondent) signed
an employment contract valid as from the same date until 30 June 2021 (hereinafter: the
contract).
2.
In accordance with the contract, the Respondent undertook to pay to the Claimant inter alia
the following amounts:
a. Season 2018/2019: EUR 2,000 as monthly salary;
b. Seasons 2019/2020 and 2020/2021: EUR 2,500 as monthly salary.
3.
On 9 July 2021, the Claimant put the Respondent in default of payment of his salaries, as
follows, granting it with a deadline of 10 days to cure the breach:
a. Season 2018/2019: EUR 12,000, corresponding to salaries from January to June 2019;
b. Season 2019/2020: EUR 30,000, corresponding to salaries from July 2019 to June 2020;
c. Season 2020/2021: EUR 30,000, corresponding to salaries from July 2020 to June 2021.
4.
On 29 July 2021, the player filed the claim at hand. The player explained that out of the EUR
72,000 he was entitled under the contract, he received only EUR 12,296, as follows:
a. EUR 3,720 on 6 February 2019;
b. EUR 736 on 4 April 2019;
c. EUR 1,840 on 26 April 2019;
d. EUR 2,000 on 26 August 2019;
e. EUR 1,600 on 17 October 2019;
f. EUR 1,000 on 5 March 2020;
g. EUR 1,400 on 18 May 2020.
5.
The player thus requests payment of EUR 59,704 as the unpaid portion of the contract plus
5% interest p.a. as from the due dates, and attorney fees of EUR 1,500.
6.
The Respondent did not reply to the claim in spite of having been invited to do so.
II. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence, admissibility, and applicable legal framework
7.
First of all, the Single Judge of the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter also referred to
as 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 29 July 2021 and
submitted for decision on 27 October 2021. Taking into account the wording of art. 34 of
Page 3
REF FPSD-3191
the October 2021 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.
8.
Subsequently, 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 Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (August 2021 edition),
he is in principle competent to deal with the matter at stake, which concerns an employmentrelated dispute with an international dimension between a Serbian player and an Albanian
club.
9.
At this point, the Single Judge referred to art. 23 par. 3 of the Regulations (edition August
2021), 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 time limit shall be examined ex officio in each individual case.
10. In this context, the Single Judge recalled that the present claim was lodged in front of FIFA
on 29 July 2021. Therefore, in line with art. 23 par. 3 of the Regulations, any amounts fallen
due before 29 July 2019 are affected by the statute of limitations.
11. The Single Judge noted that, in the present case, the Claimant inter alia requested the
payment of some salaries regarding the season 2018/2019, i.e. those due between January
and June 2019. The Single Judge thus concluded that the Claimant’s request is partially timebarred. Consequently, the specific part of the Claimant’s claim related to the payment of
salaries from January to May 2019 is considered inadmissible. To this end, the Single Judge
clarified that the salary of June 2019 was due on the last day of that month, i.e. 30 June
2019, so within the 2 years of the statute of limitations.
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 (August 2021 edition), and
considering the date the present claim was lodged, the February 2021 edition of said
regulations (hereinafter: the Regulations) is applicable to the matter at hand as to the
substance.
b. Burden of proof
13. 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, he 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).
Page 4
REF FPSD-3191
c. Merits of the dispute
14. His competence and the applicable regulations having been established, the Single Judge
entered into the merits of the dispute. In this respect, he started by acknowledging all the
above-mentioned facts as well as the arguments and the documentation on file. However,
he emphasised that in the following considerations he will refer only to the facts, arguments
and documentary evidence, which he considered pertinent for the assessment of the matter
at hand.
i. Main legal discussion and considerations
15. The foregoing having been established, the Single Judge moved to the substance of the
matter, and took note of the fact that the Respondent failed to present its response to the
claim of the Claimant, in spite of having been invited to do so. In this way, the Single Judge
considered that the Respondent renounced its right to defence and thus accepted the
allegations of the Claimant.
16. Furthermore, as a consequence of the aforementioned consideration, the Single Judge
emphasised that in accordance with art. 21 par. 1 and 22 of the Procedural Rules, he shall
take a decision upon the basis of the documents already on file, in other words, upon the
statements and documents presented by the Claimant.
17. In this context, the Single Judge acknowledged that the Claimant filed a claim for outstanding
remuneration only, which remained undisputed, and confirmed that the Claimant has
substantiated his claim with adequate supporting evidence.
18. In view of the foregoing and bearing in mind the basic legal principle of pact sunt servanda,
which in essence means that agreements must be respected by the parties in good faith, the
Respondent is held liable to pay the Claimant the outstanding amounts deriving from the
contract concluded between the parties, namely the following:
Period
Jun-19
Jul-19
Aug-19
Sep-19
Oct-19
Nov-19
Dec-19
Jan-20
Feb-20
Mar-20
Salary
Payment by the club
EUR 2,000
EUR 2,500
EUR 2,500
EUR 2,000
EUR 2,500
EUR 2,500
EUR 1,600
EUR 2,500
EUR 2,500
EUR 2,500
EUR 2,500
EUR 2,500
EUR 1,000
Balance
EUR 2,000
EUR 2,500
EUR 500
EUR 2,500
EUR 900
EUR 2,500
EUR 2,500
EUR 2,500
EUR 2,500
EUR 1,500
Page 5
REF FPSD-3191
Apr-20
May-20
Jun-20
Jul-20
Aug-20
Sep-20
Oct-20
Nov-20
Dec-20
Jan-21
Feb-21
Mar-21
Apr-21
May-21
Jun-21
EUR 2,500
EUR 2,500
EUR 2,500
EUR 2,500
EUR 2,500
EUR 2,500
EUR 2,500
EUR 2,500
EUR 2,500
EUR 2,500
EUR 2,500
EUR 2,500
EUR 2,500
EUR 2,500
EUR 2,500
TOTAL
EUR 1,400
-
EUR 2,500
EUR 1,100
EUR 2,500
EUR 2,500
EUR 2,500
EUR 2,500
EUR 2,500
EUR 2,500
EUR 2,500
EUR 2,500
EUR 2,500
EUR 2,500
EUR 2,500
EUR 2,500
EUR 2,500
EUR 56,000
19. As a consequence, the Single Judge decided that the Respondent is liable to pay to the
Claimant the amounts claimed as outstanding under the contract, in total of EUR 56,000, as
detailed above.
20. In addition, taking into consideration the Claimant’s request as well as the constant practice
of the Football Tribunal in this regard, the Single Judge decided to award the Claimant interest
at the rate of 5% p.a. on the outstanding amounts as from their respective due dates until
the date of effective payment.
ii. Art. 12bis of the Regulations
21. In continuation, the Single Judge referred to art. 12bis par. 2 of the Regulations, which
stipulates that any club found to have delayed a due payment for more than 30 days without
a prima facie contractual basis may be sanctioned in accordance with art. 12bis par. 4 of the
Regulations.
22. To this end, the Single Judge confirmed that the player put the club in default of payment of
the amounts sought, which had fallen due more than 30 days before, and granted the club
a 10-day deadline to cure such breach of contract.
23. Accordingly, the Single Judge confirmed that the club had delayed a due payment without a
prima facia contractual basis. It followed that the criteria enshrined in art. 12bis of the
Regulations was met in the case at hand.
24. The Single Judge further established that by virtue of art. 12bis par. 4 of the Regulations he
has competence to impose sanctions on the club. On account of the above and bearing in
Page 6
REF FPSD-3191
mind that this is the 3rd offense by the club within the last two years, the Single Judge decided
to impose a fine of USD 7,500 on the club in accordance with art. 12bis par. 4 lit. c) of the
Regulations. In this connection, the Single Judge highlighted that a repeated offence will be
considered as an aggravating circumstance and lead to a more severe penalty in accordance
with art. 12bis par. 6 of the Regulations.
iii. Compliance with monetary decisions
25. Finally, taking into account the applicable Regulations, the Single Judge referred to art. 24bis
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.
26. 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.
27. 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. 24bis par. 2, 4, and 7 of the Regulations.
28. 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.
29. 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 of the
Regulations.
d. Costs
30. 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.
Page 7
REF FPSD-3191
31. 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.
32. Lastly, the Single Judge concluded the deliberations by rejecting any other requests for relief
made by any of the parties.
Page 8
REF FPSD-3191
III. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Sciprim Taipi, is partially accepted insofar it is admissible.
2.
The Respondent, KS Skenderbeu Korce, has to pay to the Claimant the following amounts:
a.
EUR 2,000 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 July 2019 until
the date of effective payment;
b.
EUR 2,500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 August 2019
until the date of effective payment;
c.
EUR 500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 September 2019
until the date of effective payment;
d.
EUR 2,500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 October 2019
until the date of effective payment;
e.
EUR 900 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 November 2019
until the date of effective payment;
f.
EUR 2,500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 December 2019
until the date of effective payment;
g.
EUR 2,500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 January 2020
until the date of effective payment;
h.
EUR 2,500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 February 2020
until the date of effective payment;
i.
EUR 2,500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 March 2020
until the date of effective payment;
j.
EUR 1,500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 April 2020 until
the date of effective payment;
k.
EUR 2,500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 May 2020 until
the date of effective payment;
l.
EUR 1,100 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 June 2020 until
the date of effective payment;
m. EUR 2,500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 July 2020 until
the date of effective payment;
Page 9
REF FPSD-3191
n.
EUR 2,500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 August 2020
until the date of effective payment;
o.
EUR 2,500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 September 2020
until the date of effective payment;
p.
EUR 2,500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 October 2020
until the date of effective payment;
q.
EUR 2,500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 November 2020
until the date of effective payment;
r.
EUR 2,500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 December 2020
until the date of effective payment;
s.
EUR 2,500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 January 2021
until the date of effective payment;
t.
EUR 2,500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 February 2021
until the date of effective payment;
u.
EUR 2,500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 March 2021
until the date of effective payment;
v.
EUR 2,500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 April 2021 until
the date of effective payment;
w. EUR 2,500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 May 2021 until
the date of effective payment;
x.
EUR 2,500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 June 2021 until
the date of effective payment;
y.
EUR 2,500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 July 2021 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.
Page 10
REF FPSD-3191
5.
Pursuant to art. 24bis of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (February 2021
edition), 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. 24bis par. 7 and 8 and art. 24ter of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of
Players.
7. The Respondent is ordered to pay a fine of USD 7,500 to FIFA within 30 days of the
notification of this decision. Such payment is to be made to the bank account below with
reference to the present proceedings:
UBS Zurich
Account number 230-366677.61N (FIFA Players’ Status)
Clearing number 230
IBAN: CH12 0023 0230 3666 7761 N
SWIFT: UBSWCHZH80A
8. This decision is rendered without costs.
For the Football Tribunal:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
Page 11
REF FPSD-3191
NOTE RELATED TO THE APPEAL PROCEDURE:
According to article 57 par. 1 of the FIFA Statutes, this decision may be appealed against before
the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) within 21 days of receipt of the notification of this
decision.
NOTE RELATED TO THE PUBLICATION:
FIFA may publish this decision. For reasons of confidentiality, FIFA may decide, at the request of a
party within five days of the notification of the motivated decision, to publish an anonymised or a
redacted version (cf. article 17 of the Procedural Rules).
CONTACT INFORMATION
Fédération Internationale de Football Association
FIFA-Strasse 20 P.O. Box 8044 Zurich Switzerland
www.fifa.com | legal.fifa.com | [email protected] | T: +41 (0)43 222 7777
Page 12