DRC Overdue Payables
Texto da decisão
REF. FPSD-18699
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 13 June 2025
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning
the player Ingrid Julieth Vidal Isaza
COMPOSITION:
Clifford J. HENDEL (USA & France), Deputy Chairperson
Dana MOHAMED AL-NOAIMI (Qatar), Member
Stijn BOEYKENS (Belgium), Member
CLAIMANT:
Ingrid Julieth Vidal Isaza, Colombia
Represented by Ivan Bykovskiy
RESPONDENT:
ZHFK Ljuboten, North Macedonia
pg. 2
REF. FPSD-18699
I. Facts of the case
1.
The parties to this dispute are:
•
•
the Colombian player Ingrid Julieth Vidal Isaza (hereinafter: the Player or the
Claimant); and
the North Macedonian club ZHFK Ljuboten (hereinafter: the Club or the
Respondent).
2.
On 15 August 2024, the Player, the Club and the Colombian club America de Cali
(hereinafter: America de Cali) concluded a document entitled “Loan Agreement”
(hereinafter: the Loan Agreement) by means of which America de Cali agreed to transfer, on
a temporary basis, the Player’s registration to the Club for the period from 16 August 2024
until 14 December 2024.
3.
On 16 August 2024, the Player and the Club entered into an employment contract
(hereinafter: the Contract) valid as from the date of signature until 14 December 2024.
4.
Clause 13 of the Contract established (quoted verbatim):
“Salary
Aticle 13
Upon the performed work tasks, the football player has the right to salary.
The Employer regulates the categorization of the football players, salary, benefits,
premiums, penalties etc., with regulations on rewarding and disciplinary measures.
The monthly net salary cannot be lower than the minimum salary determined in a social
dialogue between the clubs and the Football Players’ Syndicate, confirmed by the
Executive Committee of FFM.
The monthly net salary of the football player amounts to 120000 denars, or 2000USD.
The salary is paid once a month, no later than the fifteenth of the current month for the
previous month, on the transactions account of the football player.
With each paid salary the football player receives a written calculation for the gross
salary with paid contributions in accordance with the Law.
Bonuses for 25 and more goals 500usd (once time)
Bonuses for Chapmions league games:
pg. 3
REF. FPSD-18699
Wining first game and wining second 1000usd (once time)
Wining first game and lose second 500usd (once time)
Lose first game and wining second 300usd (once time)”
5.
On 4 September 2024, the Club lost 10-0 against Valur.
6.
On 7 September 2024, the Club won 2-0 against Cardiff City.
7.
On 9 November 2024, the Player’s agent exchanged the following WhatsApp messages with
a contact saved as “Dragoljub Ljuboten”, who, according to the Player, was Mr. Dragoljub
Jovanovski, the Club’s representative (quoted verbatim):
“(…)
Player’s agent: “do you need the Colombian accounts of the players to send the last
payment right?”
Dragoljub Ljuboten: “No western union
Next month“
Player’s agent: “okkk, ingrid also?”
Dragoljub Ljuboten: “I pay salary yestarday to paula and alexa
Yea”
Player’s agent: “or you Will pay her part of the salary when she leaves and the rest by
december 15?
i am asking you so I can explain everything to them at the same time”
Dragoljub Ljuboten: “I can't promise if money come untill end of next week i will
But if they don't i will can't”
Player’s agent: “it is ok amigo, by the end of the month or early december is ok
in the same way if they were still in macedonia”
Dragoljub Ljuboten: “Money newd to come from 10-20 november
pg. 4
REF. FPSD-18699
The exactly day i don't know”
Player’s agent: “it Will be the salary + bonus for champions league all together or
separete? before we continue, please say (…)”
8.
According to the Club, on 18 November 2024, the parties mutually terminated the Contract
by means of a document entitled “Decision for amicable termination” (hereinafter: the
Alleged Termination Agreement). In this document, allegedly the Player stated that there was
no claims based on salary, scholarship or other benefits. The Player disputed the veracity
of this document and argued that she did not sign it.
9.
On 19 November 2024, the Player flew from Belgrade (Serbia) to Cali (Colombia) with
stopovers in Istanbul (Türkiye) and Bogota (Colombia).
10. On 27 January 2025, the Player put the Club in default and requested payment of USD
3,300, of which USD 2,000 corresponded to the salary for November 2024, USD 1,000 to
the prorated salary for December 2024 and USD 300 for a Champions League bonus. The
Player granted the Club 10 days to comply with the payment.
II. Proceedings before FIFA
11. On 21 March 2025, the Claimant filed the claim at hand before FIFA. A summary of the
parties’ respective positions is detailed below.
a. Claim of the Claimant
12. The Player argued that the parties concluded the Contract, which was valid as from 16
August 2024 until 14 December 2024, but the Club never provided her with the signed copy.
However, the Player argued that this unsigned copy was also uploaded to TMS and,
therefore, should be considered valid and admissible. Furthermore, the Player stated that
the document attached to the Club’s email of 14 August 2024 sent to her agent included
only her signature, and that the Loan Agreement was concluded on the same date. Also,
the Player argued that UEFA’s official website confirms her registration.
13. In this regard, the Player argued that she was entitled to a monthly salary of USD 2,000 net
and to a bonus of USD 300 if the Club lost the first game of the Champions League and won
the second one. Nonetheless, the Player alleged that the Club failed to pay her the salary
for November in full, as well as the prorated salary for December and the bonus for the
Champions League performance. Thus, the Player asserted that she put the Club in default,
but to no avail.
14. The Claimant’s requests for relief were the following:
pg. 5
REF. FPSD-18699
“Considering the foregoing, the professional football player Ms. Ingrid Julieth Vidal Isaza
respectfully requests the FIFA DRC to rule as follows:
1. The Claim of the Claimant, Ms. Ingrid Julieth Vidal Isaza, is accepted.
2. The Respondent, Women Football Club Ljuboten, Macedonia, is obliged to pay the
following amounts:
USD 2.903 (Two thousand nine hundred three) USD dollars net of any taxes or
withholdings as salary for November and December 2024;
USD 300 (Three hundred) US Dollars as the prize money for the results of Women's
Champions League 2024;
Interest at 5% p.a. rate as default interest for late payment since December 15, 2024,
until the effective date of the payment of the outstanding amounts.
3. In case of non-payment within the stipulated terms as per the FIFA decision, sanctions
are imposed on the Respondent as per Art. 24 of FIFA RSTP.”
b. Reply of the Respondent
15. In its reply, the Club contended that the Player, for her own reasons, requested to
terminate the Contract before its expiration date and, therefore, the parties signed an
amicable termination agreement on 18 November 2024. The Club stated that, in the
Alleged Termination Agreement, the Player confirmed that she had no claims related to
salary, scholarship or other remedies.
16. Furthermore, the Club argued that after signing the termination, the Player left the country
using a plane ticket purchased by the Club, although the season was not yet over, which
demonstrates that the parties terminated the Contract amicably.
17. Additionally, the Club argued that the bonus related to the Champions League had been
paid and provided evidence in this regard.
18. Based on the above, the Club requested that the claim be rejected and declared null and
void.
c. Replica of the Claimant
19. In her replica, the Claimant referred to the Alleged Termination Agreement and stated that
there was no sense in signing a premature termination when less than a month remained
pg. 6
REF. FPSD-18699
of the Contract’s duration. Notwithstanding, the Player argued that she has never seen or
signed any termination document.
20. In this context, the Player alleged that her signature is not included on the Alleged
Termination Agreement but only her name appeared, written by someone else.
Additionally, the Player mentioned that the statement in the document asserting she had
no claims regarding the salaries is written in a different pen. Therefore, the Player asserted
that this document shall be disregarded.
21. Concerning the flight tickets, the Player acknowledged that they were purchased by the
Club so she could return home after the sporting season ended in late November.
However, the Player argued that this fact does not validate the Alleged Termination
Agreement.
22. In any case, the Player referred to art. 341 (1) of the Swiss Code of Obligations (SCO), which
explicitly prohibits an employee from waiving claims that arise from mandatory law,
particularly concerning remuneration and salary-related rights. Therefore, the Player
pointed out that even if one were to accept the statements that there are no claims
regarding the salaries, such a waiver should be considered null and void.
23. Furthermore, the Player contended that the Club failed to provide any financial document
proving that it effectively transferred the amounts due to the Player.
24. According to the Player, her agent and the Club’s representative, Mr. Dragoljub Jovanovski,
exchanged some messages in which the Club’s representative informed him that the
remaining parts of the Player’s salary and bonus would be sent through Western Union the
following month. In this respect, the Player stated that it made no sense that the Club’s
representative stated that the payment would be made next month if there was no claim
regarding salaries. Nonetheless, the Player insisted that the Club did not provide any
transfer confirmation to her account.
25. Regarding the Champions League bonus, the Player alleged that the proof of payment must
be disregarded as (i) it is not in English, and (ii) does not contain her signature.
26. In light of all the above, the Player maintained her previous requests for relief.
d. Duplica of the Respondent
27. Despite having been invited to do so, the Respondent failed to provide its final comments.
pg. 7
REF. FPSD-18699
III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
a. Competence and applicable legal framework
28. 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 21 March 2025 and submitted for decision on
13 June 2025. Taking into account the wording of arts. 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.
29. 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 with an international dimension
between a Colombian player and a North Macedonian club.
30. Subsequently, the Chamber analysed which regulations should be applicable as to the
substance of the matter. In this respect, it confirmed that, in accordance with art. 29 of the
Regulations, the January 2025 edition of the Regulations is applicable to the matter at hand
as to the substance.
b. Burden of proof
31. The Chamber 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 Chamber stressed
the wording of art. 13 par. 4 of the Procedural Rules, pursuant to which it may consider
evidence not filed by the parties, including without limitation the evidence generated by or
within the Transfer Matching System (TMS).
c. Merits of the dispute
32. Having established the competence and the applicable regulations, the Chamber entered
into the merits of the dispute. In this respect, the Chamber started by acknowledging all
the above-mentioned facts as well as the arguments and the documentation on file.
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
assessing the matter at hand.
pg. 8
REF. FPSD-18699
i. Main legal discussion and considerations
33. The Chamber then moved to the substance of the matter, noting that it concerned a claim
of a player against a club for outstanding remuneration.
34. The Chamber recalled that, according to the Player, the Club failed to pay her the salaries
for November and December 2024, as well as a bonus for the Club’s performance in the
Champions League.
35. The Chamber noted that, conversely, the Club stated that the parties concluded a
termination agreement, in which it was established that the Player had no claims against
the Club. Additionally, the Club argued that the Champions League bonus had been paid.
36. In this context, the Chamber acknowledged that its task was to determine whether the
Player is entitled to the amounts she is claiming. Therefore, the Chamber proceeded to
analyse the Player’s claims in turn.
a) Salaries
37. Regarding the salaries, the Chamber noted that the Contract was, in principle, valid until
14 December 2024. The Chamber also observed that the Player was entitled to a monthly
salary of USD 2,000 net and that the Player is claiming the full salary for November as well
as the prorated salary for December.
38. The Chamber recalled that, conversely, the Club relies on the Alleged Termination
Agreement allegedly concluded on 18 November 2024 to assert that the Player is not
entitled to any further amounts, as well as on the flight tickets provided to the Player. The
Player, nonetheless, argued that the Alleged Termination Agreement was forged and that,
in any case, would be invalid, as a waiver of salary is prohibited. However, the Chamber
noted that the Player acknowledged that the Club provided her with the flight tickets.
39. In this context, the Chamber highlighted that it is undisputed that, despite the Contract
being valid until 14 December 2024, the Player returned to her country on 19 November
2024. Additionally, the Chamber noted that there is no evidence demonstrating that the
parties concluded an agreement for further payments, i.e., that the Club would pay her the
salary for December even though she left before the Contract’s expiration. Although the
Player provided an alleged WhatsApp conversation with the Club’s representative, which
was not disputed by the Club in its duplica, the Chamber remarked that this exchange does
not clearly establish that the Club agreed to pay her the salaries for November and
December 2024, and the Champions League bonus.
40. Furthermore, the Chamber pointed out that the Player did not claim that the Club
unilaterally terminated the Contract or that she was prevented from continuing her duties.
The Player argued that the return ticket was purchased due to the end of the season but
pg. 9
REF. FPSD-18699
also failed to provide that this date was actually the end of the season, especially
considering that the Contract clearly stated it was valid until 14 December 2024.
41. In this regard, the Chamber concluded that the Player provided services to the Club until
19 November 2024 and, therefore, was entitled to the salary for that month. Nonetheless,
the Chamber considered that she was not entitled to the prorated amount for December,
as she did not provide any services and there is no subsequent document indicating that,
after her departure, the Club undertook to pay the December salary.
42. Having stated the above, the Chamber underscored that the Club did not provide any proof
of payment demonstrating that it paid the salary for November but submitted the Alleged
Termination Agreement, which is disputed by the Claimant. In this regard, in the Chamber’s
view, the analysis of the validity of this agreement is moot: even if it were deemed valid,
the Player would have waived the salary for the month of November, i.e., salary for work
already performed, without the Club presenting any argument or evidence of reciprocal
concessions.
43. Furthermore, the Chamber remarked that the Club failed to provide any evidence of having
paid the salary for November despite this being explicitly disputed by the Player. In the
Chamber’s opinion, if the Player had no claims against the Club, the Club should have been
able to prove that all amounts due under the Contract were paid. Consequently, the
Chamber could only conclude that the Club failed to pay the Player the salary for November
2024.
44. Based on the above, the Chamber decided to award the Player USD 2,000 net
corresponding to the salary for November 2024, with 5% interest p.a. as from 16 December
2024, considering that salaries were to be paid on the 15th of the following month.
b) Bonus
45. Then, the Chamber moved on to analyse the claim regarding the bonus. The Chamber first
noted that the Contract established that the Player was entitled to a bonus of USD 300 in
the specific scenario where, out of the two Champions League games, the Club lost the first
game and won the second. In this respect, the Player provided evidence demonstrating
that these conditions were met, as the Club lost the first game but won the second.
46. The Chamber recalled that, in this case, the Club submitted evidence allegedly
demonstrating that this bonus had been paid. However, this payment was contested by
the Player.
47. In this regard, the Chamber underlined that the evidence was not fully translated and
included unidentified signatures. Moreover, the Chamber emphasised that, after the Player
disputed the authenticity of this proof of payment, the Club did not provide any further
comments or clarifications.
pg. 10
REF. FPSD-18699
48. Based on the above, the Chamber decided to disregard this evidence, based on art. 13 par.
1 and 3 of the Procedural Rules, and award the Player USD 300 as bonus. Additionally, given
that the Contract did not specify payment dates for the bonuses, the Chamber decided to
award interest on this amount as from the day following the Contract’s end date, i.e., 15
December 2024.
ii. Art. 12bis of the Regulations
49. The Chamber then 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.
50. To this end, the Chamber confirmed that the Claimant put the Respondent in default of
payment of the amounts sought, which had fallen due for more than 30 days, and granted
the Respondent with at least 10 days to cure such breach of contract.
51. Accordingly, the Chamber also confirmed that the Respondent had delayed a due payment
without a prima facie contractual basis. It followed that the criteria enshrined in art. 12bis
of the Regulations were met in the case at hand.
52. The Chamber further established that, by virtue of art. 12bis par. 4 of the Regulations the
Chamber has competence to impose sanctions on the club. On account of the above and
bearing in mind that the Club had previous sanctions, the Chamber decided to impose a
reprimand on the Respondent in accordance with art. 12bis par. 4 lit. b) of the Regulations.
53. The Chamber also highlighted that a repeated offence will be considered as an aggravating
circumstance and lead to more severe penalty, in accordance with art. 12bis par. 6 of the
Regulations.
iii. Compliance with monetary decisions
54. Finally, taking into account the applicable Regulations, the Chamber 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 and/or
compensation in due time.
55. In this regard, the DRC 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.
pg. 11
REF. FPSD-18699
56. Therefore, bearing in mind the above, the DRC 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.
57. 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.
58. The DRC 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.
d. Costs
59. 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.
60. 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.
61. Lastly, the DRC concluded its deliberations by rejecting any other requests for relief made
by any of the parties.
pg. 12
REF. FPSD-18699
IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Ingrid Julieth Vidal Isaza, is partially accepted.
2.
The Respondent, ZHFK Ljuboten, must pay to the Claimant the following amounts:
- USD 2,000 net as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 16 December
2024 until the date of effective payment;
- USD 300 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 15 December 2024
until the date of effective payment.
3.
Any further claims of the Claimant are rejected.
4.
A reprimand is imposed on the Respondent.
5.
Full payment (including all applicable interest) shall be made to the bank account indicated
in the enclosed Bank Account Registration Form.
6.
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.
7.
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.
8.
This decision is rendered without costs.
For the Football Tribunal:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
pg. 13
REF. FPSD-18699
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. 14