Dispute Resolution Chamber
Texto da decisão
REF FPSD-2653
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 15 July 2021
regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the player Andrei Vshivtsev
COMPOSITION:
Omar Ongaro (Italy), Deputy Chairman
Stéphane Burchkalter (France)
Abu Nayeem Shohag (Bangladesh), member
CLAIMANT:
Andrei Vshivtsev, Russia
RESPONDENT:
FC Dnepr-Mogilev, Belarus
Page 2
REF FPSD-2653
I. Facts
1. On 22 August 2018, the Claimant and FC Dnepr concluded an employment contract valid as
from the date of signature until 3 December 2018.
2. According to art. 1.3.1 of the contract, the player was entitled to BYN 159.36 per month.
3. By orders of the Club No. 202-k dated 5 November 2018 due to unsatisfactory sports results of
the Club, the Claimant’s “high performance bonus” was reduced by the amount of BYN 2
883,81 for October 2018
4. By order No. 220- of 30 November 2018, due to the same reasons, the players’ “high
performance bonuses” was reduced by BYN 2 596,00 for November 2018
5. According to the player, together with other players of FC Dnepr, he tried to collective claim
before Belarus Football Federation on 4 December 2018
6. On 22 March 2021 the Claimant sent the default note to FC Dnepr Mahilyow regarding
outstanding payments of his salary in the total amount of BYN 5 479,81, setting a time limit of
15 (fifteen) calendar days (until 7 April 2021), and noting that said club is “is a sporting and
legal successor of FC Dnyapro. This fact was confirmed by the Decision of the FIFA Dispute
Resolution Chamber passed on 10 December 2020 No. REF 20-00452.”
7.
On 28 May 2021, the player lodged a claim before FIFA and requested the payment of the
outstanding amount of BYN 5,479.81 net, plus 5% interest p.a. as from the due dates,
corresponding to the amounts deducted by the orders of 5 November 2018 and 30 November
2018.
8.
In its reply to the Claim, FC Dnipro-Mogilev stated that it “cannot explain the objectivity of the
reduction of allowances for unsatisfactory results of matches due to the fact that the
"Institution" is not and has never been the legal successor (…) "Football Club Dnipro”.
9.
However, the club argued that “it is obvious that based on the terms of the contract attached
by the Player, we note that such reduction was provided for by the contract.
10.
The club further underlined that the claim is time-barred, since more than two years have
elapsed since November 2018.
11.
In his replica, the player insisted that the condition of the Respondent as sporting successor was
already established in the matter 20-00452, and that said decision was not appealed.
12.
The player argued that the reference to the provisions of the Belarusian legislation in this case
“is not applicable, since the Respondent, being a member of the Belarus Football Federation, is
obliged to comply with the specialised regulations and rules established by the FIFA, i.e. lex
sportiva, which will take precedence over national rules in an international dispute involving
stakeholders of organised football.”
13.
The Claimant further considered that art. 25 par. 5 shall not be applied since “the present
dispute is mainly regulated by the article 24ter to the Regulations (Implementation of decision
Page 3
REF FPSD-2653
and confirmation letters), which came into force only on 1 January 2020. Hence, the Claimant
received the chance to protect his rights reasonably and in a proper manner only after 1 January
2020, which, in general, should be recognized as a start of the time limit calculation.”
14.
As final comments, the Respondent insisted that the claim is time-barred.
II.
Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
First of all, the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter also referred to
as Chamber or DRC) analysed whether it was competent to deal with the case at hand.
Taking into account the wording of art. 21 of the January 2021 edition of the Rules
Governing the Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution
Chamber (hereinafter: the Procedural Rules), the aforementioned edition of the Procedural
Rules is applicable to the matter at hand.
2.
Subsequently, the Dispute Resolution Chamber referred to art. 3 par. 1 of the Procedural
Rules and emphasised that, in accordance with art. 24 par. 1 in combination with art.
22 lit. b) of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players, the Dispute Resolution
Chamber is competent to deal with matters which concern employment-related disputes
with an international dimension between players and clubs.
3.
Having this in mind, the DRC stressed on the content of art. 25 par. 5 of the Regulations on
the Status and Transfer of Players which reads as follows: “The Players’ Status Committee,
the Dispute Resolution Chamber, the single judge or the DRC judge (as the case may be)
shall not hear any case subject to these regulations if more than two years have elapsed
since the event giving rise to the dispute. Application of this time limit shall be examined ex
officio in each individual case”.
4.
In view of the above, the Chamber had to determine which is the event giving rise to the
present dispute. In doing so, the DRC deemed it important to emphasize the claim is related
to remuneration allegedly due until December 2018.
5.
Having said this, the Chamber recalled that the claim was lodged on 28 May 2021, i.e. clearly
more than two years after said salaries would have been due.
6.
On account of all the above, and considering that more than two years have elapsed
between the event giving rise to the dispute, the Chamber concluded that the Claimant’s
claim must be considered barred by the statute of limitations in accordance with art. 25 par.
5 of the Regulations.
7.
In light of the above, the DRC decided that the claim of the Claimant is inadmissible.
Page 4
REF FPSD-2653
III. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Andrei Vshivtsev, is inadmissible.
For the Dispute Resolution Chamber:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
Page 5
REF FPSD-2653
NOTE RELATED TO THE APPEAL PROCEDURE:
According to article 58 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 20 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 6