Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF. FPSD-17500
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 3 April 2025
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the player Jefferson
Tavares da Silva
BY:
Lívia SILVA KÄGI (Brazil & Switzerland), Deputy Chairwoman
Khadija TIMERA (Senegal), Member
Jorge GUTIÉRREZ (Costa Rica), Member
CLAIMANT:
Jefferson Tavares da Silva, Brazil
Represented by Filipe Orsolini Pinto de Souza
RESPONDENT:
Wilstermann, Bolivia
Represented by Enric Ripoll Gonzalez
pg. 2
REF. FPSD-17500
I. Facts of the case
1.
On 8 January 2024, the Brazilian and Bolivian player, Jefferson Tavares da Silva (hereinafter:
the Player or the Claimant), and the Bolivian club, Wilstermann (hereinafter: the Club or the
Respondent) entered into an employment contract (hereinafter: the Contract) valid as from
8 January 2024 until 31 December 2025.
2.
The Contract specified, inter alia, the following:
“1.2) El Sr. JEFFERSON TAVARES DA SILVA, mayor de edad, hábil por Ley, con Pasaporte Nº
YC351967, Brasilero (naturalizado Boliviano), […].
Freely translated into English:
“1.2.) Mr. JEFFERSON TAVARES DA SILVA, of legal age, with passport number YC351967,
Brazilian (naturalized Bolivian), [...]”
3.
In accordance with the Contract, the Respondent undertook to pay to the Claimant an
annual salary of USD 99,000 net for the 2024 season and an annual salary of USD 110,000
net for the 2025 season.
4.
On 1 December 2024, the Claimant put the Respondent in default of payment of USD
58,050 setting a time limit expiring on 16 December 2024 in order to remedy the default.
5.
On 17 December 2024, the Claimant terminated the Contract with the Respondent.
II. Proceedings before FIFA
6.
On 17 December 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
7.
The Claimant alleged that he terminated the Contract with just cause due to outstanding
salaries.
8.
The Claimant further argued that he is entitled to the outstanding salaries and a
compensation corresponding to the residual value of the Contract plus three-monthly
salaries.
9.
The Claimant’s requests for relief, were the following:
“6.1. In view of all above, the Claimant requests:
pg. 3
REF. FPSD-17500
a. the DRC to send this claim to Club Deportivo Jorge Wilstermann (Bolivia) with a time limit
for a statement or a reply, pursuant article 21.1 the FIFA Procedural;
b. the DRC to accept this claim and declare that the Employment Contract signed by and
between the parties was terminated with just cause for outstanding salaries on 17 December
2024, according to article 14bis of the FIFA RSTP;
c. the DRC to accept this claim and order the Respondent Club Deportivo Jorge Wilstermann
(Bolivia) to pay to the Claimant the following:
(i)
the outstanding salaries in the net amount of USD 58,050 (fifty-eight thousand and
fifty American Dollars), plus interests of 5% p.a. as from the due date of each
payment;
(ii)
a compensation equal to the residual value of the contract that was prematurely
terminated in the total net amount of USD 119,000 (one hundred and nineteen
thousand American Dollars), plus interests of 5% p.a. as from 17 December 2024;
(iii)
an additional compensation in the total net amount of USD 27,000 (twenty-nine
thousand American Dollars), plus interests of 5% p.a. as from 16 December 2024.
d. the DRC to accept this claim and sanction the Respondent Club Deportivo Jorge
Wilstermann (Bolivia) in accordance with article 17.4 of FIFA RSTP.
e. the DRC to accept this claim and include the consequences of the failure to pay the relevant
amounts in due time, pursuant article 24 of the FIFA RSTP.”
b. Reply of the Respondent
10. In its reply, the Respondent disputed FIFA’s competence to deal with this dispute due to its
alleged lack of international dimension.
11. In this respect, the Respondent alleged that the Claimant was registered with the
Respondent as a Bolivian national.
12. The Respondent further argued that by being registered as a Bolivian national and using
that nationality for his sporting benefit, the Claimant cannot be considered a foreign player.
13. The Respondent’s requests for relief were the following:
“En virtud de los argumentos expuestos, solicitamos respetuosamente que el Tribunal del
Fútbol de la FIFA:
pg. 4
REF. FPSD-17500
1. Tenga en cuenta esta Excepción de Falta de Competencia por la ausencia de dimensión
internacional y determine que no es evidente ni obvia su competencia para conocer del
presente caso.
2. Rechace su competencia en base a la falta de dimensión internacional de la disputa,
conforme al artículo 22 del RETJ.
3. Tome nota de que el jugador Jefferson Tavares se benefició deportivamente al ser
considerado jugador boliviano durante su inscripción y participación, confirmando aún más
la ausencia de un elemento internacional.”
Freely translated into English as:
“In light of the arguments presented, we respectfully request that the FIFA Football Tribunal:
1. Consider this Exception for Lack of Jurisdiction due to the absence of an international
dimension and determine that its competence to hear this case is neither evident nor obvious.
2. Decline jurisdiction based on the lack of an international dimension in the dispute, in
accordance with Article 22 of the RETJ.
3. Take note that the player, Jefferson Tavares, benefited sportingly from being considered a
Bolivian player during his registration and participation, further confirming the absence of
an international element.”
c. Replica of the Claimant
14. In his Replica, the Claimant argued that he was engaged and registered with the
Respondent as a Brazilian national since the passport used in the Contract was issued by
Brazil.
15. The Claimant reiterated its requests for relief.
d. Duplica of the Respondent
16. In its Duplica, the Respondent highlighted that the decisive factor in determining
jurisdiction is the player's sporting nationality at the time of registration with the
corresponding Member Association, not the passport used for signing the employment
contract.
17. The Respondent submitted an official certification from the FBF that, in the Respondent’s
view, confirmed that the Claimant was registered with the Respondent as a Bolivian
national and, consequently, did not occupy a foreign slot.
pg. 5
REF. FPSD-17500
18. The Respondent reiterated its requests for relief.
e. Information provided by the FBF
19. At the request of the FIFA general secretariat, the FBF informed that the Claimant was
registered with the Respondent as a Bolivian national and included a copy of the Claimant’s
birth certificate issued by the Bolivian authorities on 30 March 2022 along with the
Claimant’s Bolivian ID.
pg. 6
REF. FPSD-17500
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
20. 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 17 December 2024 and submitted for decision
on 3 April 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.
21. 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 competent to deal with the matter at
stake, which concerns an employment-related dispute.
22. The Chamber however noted that the international dimension of the present dispute,
which would determine its competence to deal with its substance, is disputed by the
parties. In particular, the Chamber noted that while the Claimant deems that FIFA is
competent to decide on the present matter, based on the fact that the passport used in
the Contract was the one issued by Brazil, the Respondent deems that the dispute at hand
does not have an international dimension, since the Claimant was registered as a Bolivian
national.
23. Before analysing the arguments of the parties and determining whether the present
dispute has or not an international dimension, the Chamber deemed it appropriate to
recall the basic principle of burden of proof, as stipulated in art. 13 par. 5 of the Procedural
Rules (January 2025 edition), according to which a party that asserts a fact has the burden
of proving it. Likewise, the Chamber stressed the wording of art. 13 par. 4 of the Procedural
Rules, pursuant to which it may consider and rely on any evidence not presented by the
parties, including without limitation the evidence generated by or within TMS.
24. Subsequently the Chamber reminded the parties that in accordance with art. 22 par. 1 lit.
b) in conjunction with art. 23 of the Regulations, FIFA is competent to deal with
employment-related disputes between a club and a player of an international dimension,
unless an independent arbitration tribunal guaranteeing fair proceedings exists at national
level. The wording of the article in question clearly implies that the first condition that
needs to be compulsorily fulfilled in order for FIFA to be competent to hear an employmentrelated dispute between a club and a player is that said dispute has an international
dimension. This means that FIFA is only competent to hear an employment-related dispute
of such kind when the parties have different nationalities.
pg. 7
REF. FPSD-17500
25. Entering the analysis of the present dispute, the Chamber first noted from the
documentation on file the Claimant holds double nationality: Brazilian by birth and Bolivian
“by descent” (i.e. “por hijos”). The Chamber further observed that the Claimant was
registered with the Respondent as a Bolivian player.
26. The jurisprudence of the Chamber shows that in cases where a player has dual citizenship,
his registration is a determining factor when assessing if the international dimension of the
dispute is given, considering that clubs may enjoy benefits in registering a player with a
certain nationality, inter alia, due to the specific limitations in the number of foreign players.
27. In this respect, the Chamber atook due note of the information provided by the FBF
showing that the Claimant was registered with the Respondent using the Bolivian
nationality. Specifically, the Chamber observed that the FBF's records indicated that the
Claimant was registered and verified in the “COMET” system as a Bolivian player.
Furthermore, the FBF has certified that throughout the 2024 season, including his
participation in both the Apertura and Clausura tournaments, the Claimant occupied a
Bolivian player slot and was never considered a foreign player in any official competition.
28. In view of the aforementioned, the Chamber concluded that the player was registered
under the same nationality as the club and therefore the present claim lacks international
dimension and is inadmissible.
b. Costs
29. 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.
30. 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.
31. Lastly, the DRC concluded its deliberations by rejecting any other requests for relief made
by any of the parties.
pg. 8
REF. FPSD-17500
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The Football Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to hear the claim of the claimant, Jefferson
Tavares da Silva.
2.
This decision is rendered without costs.
For the Football Tribunal:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
pg. 9
REF. FPSD-17500
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. 10