Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
REF FPSD-6583
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 17 August 2022
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the player Adama
Traore
BY:
Jon NEWMAN (USA)
CLAIMANT:
Adama Traore, Mali
Represented by Mr Sami Dinç
RESPONDENT:
Hatayspor Kulübü Derneği, Türkiye
Represented by Mr Ismail Coşkun
Page 2
REF FPSD-6583
I. Facts of the case
1.
On 11 September 2020, the Malian player, Adama Traore (hereinafter: the Claimant), and
the Turkish club, Hatayspor Kulübü Derneği (hereinafter: the Respondent) signed an
employment contract valid as from the date of signature until 31 May 2022 (hereinafter:
the Contract).
2.
In accordance with the Contract, the Respondent undertook to pay to the Claimant inter
alia an annual salary of EUR 500,000, payable in ten monthly instalments of EUR 50,000
each that fell due on the last day of the following respective month, as well as an “advance
payment” of EUR 200,000, payable on 31 July 2021.
3.
On 20 May 2022, the Player lodged a first claim before FIFA (matter FPSD-6118) for
overdue payables requesting the outstanding remuneration of EUR 200,000
corresponding to four outstanding monthly salaries for the period between January 2022
and April 2022.
4.
On 21 July 2022, the Dispute Resolution Chamber rendered a decision in matter FPSD6118, ruling that the Respondent had to pay the amount of EUR 200,000 as outstanding
remuneration plus interests. Additionally, a fine of USD 15,000 was imposed to the
Respondent.
II. Proceedings before FIFA
5.
On 1 July 2022, the Claimant filed the claim at hand before FIFA. A brief summary of the
position of the parties is detailed in continuation.
a. Position of the Claimant
6.
According to the Claimant, the Respondent failed to comply with its financial obligations
under the Contract by not paying two monthly salaries for the period between
May 2022 and June 2022, in the total amount of EUR 100,000.
7.
The Claimant argued that the outstanding amounts (EUR 100,000) must be paid by the
Respondent.
8.
The Claimant requested payment of said amounts, with the application of interest at the
standard rate of 5% p.a. as from the respective due dates of the unpaid instalments until
the date of effective payment.
9.
Lastly, the Claimant requested that any procedural and legal fees arising from the
proceedings at hand shall be paid by the Respondent.
Page 3
REF FPSD-6583
b. Position of the Respondent
10. In its response to the claim, the Respondent briefly acknowledged the unpaid amounts,
justifying said non-payment with the economic situation in Türkiye and, in particular, the
depreciation of the local currency, the Turkish Lira.
11. The Respondent, therefore, only requested a reduction of the amounts payable.
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
12. 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 1 July 2022
and submitted for decision on 17 August 2022. Taking into account the wording of art. 34
of the June 2022 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.
13. Subsequently, 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
lit. b) of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (July 2022 edition), the Single
Judge is competent to deal with the matter at stake, which concerns an employmentrelated dispute with an international dimension between a Malian player and a Turkish
club.
14. 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 (July 2022 edition),
and considering that the present claim was lodged on 1 July 2022, the July 2022 edition of
said regulations (hereinafter: the Regulations) is applicable to the matter at hand as to the
substance.
b. Burden of proof
15. 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 TMS (Transfer Matching System).
Page 4
REF FPSD-6583
c. Merits of the dispute
16. The competence and the applicable regulations having been established, 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 the assessment of the matter at hand.
i. Main legal discussion and considerations
17. The foregoing having been established, the Single Judge moved to the substance of the
matter, and took note of the fact that the claim at hand pertains to the non-payment of
certain financial obligations under the Contract, namely EUR 100,000, corresponding to
the remuneration for the period between May 2022 and June 2022.
18. In this context, the Single Judge noted that neither party contested the non-payment of
the amounts claimed by the Claimant. Therefore, he acknowledged that his task was to
determine, based on the arguments presented by the parties, whether the Respondent
had a valid justification for not having complied with its financial obligations.
19. The Single Judge took note of the Respondent’s argumentation that the salaries owed to
the Claimant remained unpaid due to financial difficulties caused by the poor economic
situation in Türkiye, and, in particular, the depreciation of the Turkish Lira.
20. In this respect, the Single Judge wished to point out that the Respondent failed to submit
any evidence corroborating the assertion that the Turkish Lira had indeed depreciated as
claimed, thereby failing to meet the burden of proving that the payments under the
Contract could be challenged.
21. Consequently, the Single Judge concluded that, as no situation of force majeure could be
established in the present matter, the Respondent has to comply with contractually
agreed payments as stipulated per the Contract.
22. In view of the foregoing, and bearing in mind the basic legal principle of pacta 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 EUR 100,000.
Page 5
REF FPSD-6583
23. 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 the Claimant the
amounts claimed as outstanding under the Contract, in total EUR 100,000, as detailed
above.
24. In addition, taking into account 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 the following dates:
-
On the amount of EUR 50,000, 5% p.a. as from 1 June 2022 until the date
of effective payment;
On the amount of EUR 50,000, 5% p.a. as from 1 July 2022 until the date
of effective payment.
ii. Compliance with monetary decisions
25. 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 his 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. 24 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 art.
24 par. 8 of the Regulations.
Page 6
REF FPSD-6583
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.
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 his deliberations by rejecting any other requests for
relief made by any of the parties.
Page 7
REF FPSD-6583
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Adama Traore, is partially accepted.
2.
The Respondent, Hatayspor Kulübü Derneği, has to pay to the Claimant, the following
amount(s):
- EUR 50,000 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 June 2022 until
the date of effective payment;
- EUR 50,000 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
Page 8
REF FPSD-6583
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 9