Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
Decis ion of the
Dis pute Res olution Cham ber
passed on 20 May 2020,
in the following composition:
Geoff Thom ps on (England), Chairman
Jérôm e Perlem uter (France), member
Angela Collins (Australia), member
on the claim lodged by the player,
Lucas de Carv alho S erra, Brazil
represented by Mrs Markéta Vochoska Haindlová
as Claimant
against the club,
FC Hlucin, Czech Republic
represented by Mr Michal Mitura
as Respondent
regarding an employment-related dispute
between the parties
I.
Facts of the cas e
1.
On 19 October 2018, the Brazilian player, Lucas de Carvalho Serra (hereinafter: the
Claimant or the player), and the Czech club, FC Hlucin (hereinafter: the Respondent
or the club) (hereinafter jointly referred to as the parties), concluded an employment
contract (hereinafter: the contract) valid as from 1 February 2019 until 31 December
2021.
2.
Art. III. a) of the contract provided the following remuneration:
“the club is obliged to provide the player with monthly remuneration amounting CZK
30,000 (in words: thirty thousand Czech crowns). The remuneration will be paid by
bank transfer to the bank account number: 3130205163/0800. The player is entitled
for the monthly remuneration in case of proper fulfilment of his contractual
obligations during the relevant month. The monthly remuneration for relevant
calendar month is payable till the end of the following calendar month after the
month, for which it should be paid”.
3.
Furthermore, art. VI. 5. of the contract stipulated that “The player is entitled to
terminate this contract (…) only if the club is in any extent for at least three months
in delay in fulfilling its obligation pay duly and on time the remuneration to the
player, and does not fulfil this obligation even within an additional period of 7 days
from receipt of the written notice (sent after a delay lasting for at least three months).
In this case, the player is entitled to terminate the contract without a notice period”.
4.
In continuation, art. VI. 7. read as follows : “In the event of disagreement between
the parties regarding the validity or invalidity of the termination, the contracting
parties undertake to subject the decision of the relevant FAČR body”.
5.
Moreover, in accordance with art. VII. 4. of the contract, “The parties undertake to
exercise their mutual obligations in accordance with the laws of the Czech Republic,
regulations of FACR, UEFA and FIFA, with regards to fact that any dispute between
them arising from the contract or initiated in connection with it will be decided based
on proposal of any of them in accordance with the Code of Procedure of FACR,
whereas the arbitral award, by which the dispute was decided, may be based on the
request of any contracting party or both reviewed in accordance with Code of
Procedure of FACR by the Arbitral Committee of FACR, without prejudice to the
possibility of seeking a review of the FACR’s by the Lausanne-based Arbitration Court
for Sport, as provided for in the FIFA and UEFA regulations”.
6.
On 31 January 2020, the player sent a default letter to the club and requested the
payment of CZK 120,000, corresponding to a part of his outstanding salaries of March,
April, May and June 2019, as well as to his two entire outstanding salaries for July and
August 2019. The player granted the club a deadline of 7 days to remedy the situation.
Player Lucas de Carvalho Serra, Brazil / Club FC Hlucin, Czech Republic
Page 2 of 14
7.
On 12 February 2020, the player sent a termination letter to the Respondent, holding
that more than three months were outstanding to him and, therefore, that he had
the right to terminate the contract according to art. VI. 5. of the contract. As such, by
means of said letter, the player further requested the payment of the outstanding
remuneration, i.e. CZK 120,000, and compensation for breach of contract.
8.
On 9 March 2020, the player lodged a claim for breach of contract against the club in
front of FIFA and requested the following:
i.
CZK 120,000 as overdue payables, plus interest for late payment at the rate of
5% p. a. as follows:
a. from the amount of CZK 15,000, for the period from 1st May 2019 until
the date of effective payment,
b. from the amount of CZK 15,000, for the period from 1st June 2019 until
the date of effective payment,
c. from the amount of CZK 15,000, for the period from 1st July 2019 until
the date of effective payment,
d. from the amount of CZK 15,000, for the period from 1st August 2019
until the date of effective payment,
e. from the amount of CZK 30,000, for the period from 1st September 2019
until the date of effective payment,
f. from the amount of CZK 30,000, for the period from 1st October 2019
until the date of effective payment.
ii.
CZK 650,000 as compensation for breach of contract, plus interest at the rate
of 5% p.a. from such amount for the period from 13th February 2020 until the
date of effective payment.
9.
In his claim, the player explained that despite having duly put the club in default by
means of his letter dated 31 January 2020 and delivered to it on 4 February 2020, the
club did not react.
10.
As such, the player deemed that he terminated the contract on 12 February 2020 in
accordance with art. VI. 5. of the contract and that said unilateral termination “was
filed based on just cause arising from the Contract”.
11.
In reply to the claim, the club referred to art. VI. 7. and art. VII. 4. of the contract and
sustained that the parties had opted for the competence of the appropriate bodies
among the Czech FA. Consequently, in its opinion, the DRC would not be competent
to adjudicate on the present as to the substance.
12.
In continuation and as to the substance, the club explained firstly that the parties
mutually agreed, allegedly on the player’s request, to postpone the player’s arrival
and joining of the team to 19 March 2019 and, as well, that the round trip flight ticket
Player Lucas de Carvalho Serra, Brazil / Club FC Hlucin, Czech Republic
Page 3 of 14
would be paid accordingly by the club. In continuation, the club held that the parties
also agreed to deduct CZK 17,738 as the flight ticket price form the player’s
remuneration. In addition, the club sustained that, as apparently also agreed between
the parties, it paid CZK 117,600 to a third party for the player’s accommodation as
from 1 November 2018 until 31 August 2019, said amounts being deducted from the
player’s remuneration.
13.
In continuation and according to the aforementioned agreed deductions to be made
as sustained by the club, it explained the following :
- for March 2019, the player would be entitled to CZK 10,645 for 11 labour days : as
such the club sustained that it paid said amount by deducting part of the flight
ticket and by performing various cash payments. In this respect, it also held that it
paid in total CZK 19,000 and provided a “Payment voucher” dated 15 June 2019,
allegedly signed by the player, which appeared to cover what was owed to the
player for March 2019.
- for April 2019, the club held that it paid in total CZK 24,000 as evidenced by the
provided bank transfer.
- for May 2019, the club held that it did not perform any payment, the salary for
May 2019 being covered by the aforementioned deduction which the parties
allegedly agreed upon.
- for June 2019, the club held that it paid in total CZK 15,000 as evidenced by the
provided bank transfer.
- for July 2019, the club held that the player went training with another club on
trial and was therefore only entitled to CZK 3,871 for 4 labour days. The club
sustained in this respect that it did not perform any payment, the salary for July
2019 being covered by the aforementioned deduction which the parties allegedly
agreed upon.
- for August 2019, the club held that the player performed only 23 days returning
late. In addition, the club held that the player was provided with a car on lease and
committed traffic offences, said costs being also deducted from his salary.
Therefore, the club did not perform any payment, the salary for August 2019 being
covered by the aforementioned deduction which the parties allegedly agreed
upon.
14.
Moreover, the club held that “the Claimant hosted in 1. SC Znojmo fotbalový klub a.s.
where contract between the parties and 1. SC Znojmo fotbalový klub a.s. was
concluded on 1st of September 2019. Included in the contract was statement of the
Claimant that he has no outstanding claims against the Respondent arising from the
contract and that the remuneration according to the contract for the duration of the
hosting shall by paid by the 1. SC Znojmo fotbalový klub a.s.. Hosting contract
terminated on 31st January 2020“.
15.
With the above in mind, the club also explained that the Claimant owed it CZK 73,864
and that the “Claimant also has been repeatedly and substantially breaking the
Player Lucas de Carvalho Serra, Brazil / Club FC Hlucin, Czech Republic
Page 4 of 14
contract and the Respondent would be entitled to claim contractual penalties which
the Respondent did not do”.
16.
In respect to the above, in case FIFA should be competent in the present case, the
Respondent requested that the claim be rejected and the final costs of the
proceedings be imposed on the Claimant.
17.
Furthermore, upon being requested to comment exclusively on the alleged proof of
payment provided by the Respondent in the amount of CZK 19,000, the Claimant
referred to the contract that the salaries would be payable via bank transfer to his
account. Despite acknowledging having received “some money (…) paid by cash (…)
for buying food or other necessities”, the Claimant held that he could not recall
having signed the cash receipt linked to the alleged payment of CZK 19,000, in any
case, said amount being not connected with the monthly remuneration arising from
the contract.
18.
Finally, the player explained that on 25 February 2020 he concluded a new
employment contract with the Czech club, SC Znojmo, valid as from 1 March 2020 until
30 June 2020 and entitling him to receive a monthly remuneration of CZK 10,000.
II.
Cons iderations of the Dis pute Res olution Cham ber
1.
First of all, the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter also referred to as DRC or
Chamber) analysed whether it was competent to deal with the case at hand. In this
respect, the Chamber took note that the present matter was submitted to FIFA on 9
March 2020. Consequently, the 2019 edition of the Rules Governing the Procedures of
the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: the
Procedural Rules) is applicable to the matter at hand (cf. art. 21 of the Procedural
Rules).
2.
Subsequently, the members of the Chamber referred to art. 3 par. 1 of the Procedural
Rules and confirmed 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 (March 2020 edition)
the Dispute Resolution Chamber shall adjudicate on employment-related disputes
between a club and a player that have an international dimension.
3.
As a consequence, the Dispute Resolution Chamber would, in principle, be competent
to decide on the present litigation which involves an Brazilian player and a Czech club
regarding an employment-related dispute.
4.
However, the Chamber acknowledged that the Respondent contested the
competence of FIFA’s deciding bodies on the basis of art. VI. 7. and art. VII. 4. of the
contract alleging that the competent bodies to deal with any dispute deriving from
the relevant employment contract were the ones of the Football Association of the
Czech Republic (hereinafter: Czech FA).
Player Lucas de Carvalho Serra, Brazil / Club FC Hlucin, Czech Republic
Page 5 of 14
5.
On the other hand, the Chamber noted that the Claimant referred to the competence
of the FIFA DRC to adjudicate in and on the claim lodged by him against the
Respondent.
6.
Taking into account all the above, the Chamber emphasised that in accordance with
art. 22 lit. b) of the March 2020 edition of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer
of Players it is competent to deal with a matter such as the one at hand, unless an
independent arbitration tribunal, guaranteeing fair proceedings and respecting the
principle of equal representation of players and clubs, has been established at national
level within the framework of the association and/or a collective bargaining
agreement. With regard to the standards to be imposed on an independent
arbitration tribunal guaranteeing fair proceedings, the Chamber referred to the FIFA
Circular no. 1010 dated 20 December 2005. Equally, the members of the Chamber
referred to the principles contained in the FIFA National Dispute Resolution Chamber
(NDRC) Standard Regulations, which came into force on 1 January 2008.
7.
In relation to the above, the Chamber also deemed it vital to outline that one of the
basic conditions that needs to be met in order to establish that another organ than
the DRC is competent to settle an employment-related dispute between a club and a
player of an international dimension, is that the jurisdiction of the relevant national
arbitration tribunal or national court derives from a clear reference in the
employment contract.
8.
Therefore, while analysing whether it was competent to hear the present matter, the
Dispute Resolution Chamber considered that it should, first and foremost, analyse
whether the employment contract at the basis of the present dispute contained a clear
jurisdiction clause.
9.
In this respect, the Chamber recalled that art. VI. 7. and art. VII. 4. of the contract
stipulate respectively that: “In the event of disagreement between the parties
regarding the validity or invalidity of the termination, the contracting parties
undertake to subject the decision of the relevant FAČR body” (art. VI. 7.), and “The
parties undertake to exercise their mutual obligations in accordance with the laws of
the Czech Republic, regulations of FACR, UEFA and FIFA, with regards to fact that any
dispute between them arising from the contract or initiated in connection with it will
be decided based on proposal of any of them in accordance with the Code of
Procedure of FACR, whereas the arbitral award, by which the dispute was decided,
may be based on the request of any contracting party or both reviewed in accordance
with Code of Procedure of FACR by the Arbitral Committee of FACR, without prejudice
to the possibility of seeking a review of the FACR’s by the Lausanne-based Arbitration
Court for Sport, as provided for in the FIFA and UEFA regulations” (art. VII. 4.).
10.
Having examined the relevant provisions, the Chamber came to the unanimous
conclusion that said provisions do not constitute a clear and exclusive jurisdiction
Player Lucas de Carvalho Serra, Brazil / Club FC Hlucin, Czech Republic
Page 6 of 14
clause in favour of specific bodies among the Czech FA such as a National Dispute
Resolution Chamber (NDRC) of the Czech FA. In addition, the Chamber also underlined
that the Respondent failed to provide any kind of evidence in support of its arguments
as to the alleged competence of said bodies.
11.
As such, on account of all the above, the Chamber established that the Respondent’s
objection towards the competence of FIFA to deal with the present matter has to be
rejected, and that the Dispute Resolution Chamber is competent, on the basis of art.
22 lit. b) of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players, to consider the
present matter as to the substance.
12.
In continuation, the Chamber analyzed which edition of the Regulations on the Status
and Transfer of Players should be applicable as to the substance of the matter. In this
respect, the Chamber referred, on the one hand, to art. 26 par. 1 and 2 of the
Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (March 2020 edition) and, on the
other hand, to the fact that the present claim was lodged on 9 March 2020. Therefore,
the Dispute Resolution Chamber concluded that the March 2020 edition of the
Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (hereinafter: the Regulations) is
applicable to the matter at hand as to the substance.
13.
The competence of the Chamber and the applicable regulations having been
established, and entering into the substance of the matter, the Chamber continued
by acknowledging the above-mentioned facts as well as the documentation contained
in the 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 the assessment of the matter at hand.
14.
Having said this, the Chamber proceeded with an analysis of the circumstances
surroundings the present matter, the parties’ arguments as well the documentation
on file, bearing in mind art. 12 par. 3 of the Procedural Rules, in accordance with which
any party claiming a right on the basis of an alleged fact shall carry the burden of
proof.
15.
First of all, the DRC acknowledged that, on 19 October 2018, the Claimant and the
Respondent had concluded an employment contract valid as from 1 February 2019
until 31 December 2021.
16.
The Chamber further observed that the Claimant lodged a claim in front of FIFA
against the Respondent seeking payment of the total amount of CZK 770,000,
asserting that the Respondent had not fulfilled its contractual obligations towards
him. More specifically, the Chamber recalled that in accordance with the contract, the
Claimant was entitled to receive, inter alia, a monthly remuneration of CZK 30,000,
payable at the end of the calendar month following the one for which the payment
was due.
Player Lucas de Carvalho Serra, Brazil / Club FC Hlucin, Czech Republic
Page 7 of 14
17.
In continuation, the members of the Chamber took into account that, on 31 January
2020, the Claimant put the Respondent in default of payment, granting it a 7 days’
deadline to recover the default and requested the payment of CZK 120,000,
corresponding to four half monthly salaries of CZK 15,000 each for the months as from
March 2019 until June 2019, plus two entire monthly salaries of CZK 30,000 each for
the months of July and August 2019.
18.
Moreover, the DRC also acknowledged that the Claimant notified the Respondent of
the termination of the contract on the basis of outstanding remuneration on 12
February 2020.
19.
The Respondent, for its part, submitted that it had applied several deductions to the
player’s salary; amounts regarding a flight ticket which the club paid, accommodation,
deduction due to the fact that the player allegedly went to a trial with another club
in July 2019, the lease of a car and some traffic offenses. Therefore, in the
Respondent’s opinion, it had no outstanding dues towards the Claimant.
20.
As such, the DRC highlighted that the central issue in the matter at stake would be,
thus, to determine as to whether the Claimant had just cause to terminate the contract
on 12 February 2020.
21.
In this respect, the Chamber wished to emphasize that, according to the Claimant, at
the time of the termination of the contract on 12 February 2020, the total amount of
CZK 120,000 was yet to be paid by the Respondent. The DRC also took due note of the
Claimant’s allegation that, at the date of termination, more than 3 months were
outstanding to him and, therefore, he had the right to terminate the contract
according to article VI. 5. of the contract.
22.
The Chamber then turned its attention to the arguments of the Respondent and
acknowledged that according to the latter, it had duly demonstrated that it had paid
all outstanding amounts to the claimant in accordance with the contract considering
several deductions made to the player’s salaries, the payment arrangements
concluded between the parties and other justified calculations operated by the
Respondent as to the payment of said salaries as described in point I./12. to I./14.
23.
Moreover, the members of the Chamber acknowledged that the Claimant, inter alia,
did not recall having received CZK 19,000 on 15 June 2019 in cash and reminded
instead that, in any case said amount was not connected with monthly remuneration
arising from the contract as the contract clearly provided that the salaries would be
payable via bank transfer to his account.
24.
As such, after having meticulously examined the evidence provided by the parties, the
Chamber deemed that from the information on file, it appeared that none of the
numerous evidences provided by the Respondent did confirm that it had duly paid the
Player Lucas de Carvalho Serra, Brazil / Club FC Hlucin, Czech Republic
Page 8 of 14
amounts claimed as to the outstanding salaries, i.e. half and full salaries as of March
2019 until August 2019.
25.
In addition, the Chamber was of the opinion that the operated deductions had not
been supported by conclusive evidence, i.e. the Respondent failed, inter alia : 1) to
remit any agreement between the parties as to the various deduction calculations to
be made; 2) to provide evidence as to the alleged agreement on the allocation of the
costs linked to the flight ticket; 3) to provide evidence of each alleged individual cash
payment for March 2019; 4) to provide evidence of the player’s alleged absence in July
2019; 5) to provide the car rental agreement, and more generally; 6) the Respondent
did no prove that the Claimant could exercise his rights of defense according to the
operated deductions which were, apparently, not communicated to him.
26.
Finally, the Chamber also took note that the Respondent held that the Claimant
repeatedly breached the contract and owed it CZK 73,864. However, the Chamber also
recalled that the Respondent confirmed that it did not have any claim against the
Claimant and, as such, that no counterclaim had been lodged in the present
proceedings.
27.
Consequently, the DRC recalled that according to the legal principle of the burden of
proof contained in art. 12 par. 3 of the Procedural Rules, any party claiming a right on
the basis of an alleged fact shall carry the burden of proof. As such, the DRC deemed
that the Respondent had not provided the necessary evidence in support of its
arguments and in accordance with said principle.
28.
Furthermore, as a consequence of the aforementioned considerations and taking into
account the documentation presented by the parties to the dispute, the Chamber
established that four half salaries, corresponding to March, April, May and June 2019,
as well as two entire monthly salaries corresponding to July and August 2019, i.e. the
total amount of CZK 120,000, had fallen due and remained outstanding at the time
of the termination of the contract by the Claimant. Consequently, the Chamber
concurred that the Respondent had seriously neglected its financial contractual
obligations towards the Claimant.
29.
On account of the above and taking into consideration the Chamber’s longstanding
jurisprudence in this respect, the Chamber decided that the Claimant had just cause
to unilaterally terminate the contract on 12 February 2020 in accordance with art. 14
of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players and that the Respondent is
to be held liable for the early termination of the contract with just cause by the player.
30.
Bearing in mind the previous considerations, the Chamber went on to deal with the
consequences of the early termination of the employment contract with just cause by
the Claimant.
Player Lucas de Carvalho Serra, Brazil / Club FC Hlucin, Czech Republic
Page 9 of 14
31.
First of all, the members of the Chamber concurred that the Respondent must fulfill
its obligations as per the employment contract in accordance with the general legal
principle of “pacta sunt servanda” as a consequence of the termination with just cause
on 12 February 2020. Consequently, the Chamber decided that the Respondent is
liable to pay to the player the remuneration that was outstanding at the time of the
termination, i.e. CZK 120,000, considering that no salary deduction had been
substantiated.
32.
Furthermore, considering the player’s claim for interest and also taking into account
the Chamber’s longstanding jurisprudence, the Chamber ruled that the club must pay
5% interest p.a. on the amount of CZK 120,000, as from the due dates until the date
of effective payment, as follows:
a. on CZK 15,000 as from 1 May 2019 until the date of effective payment;
b. on CZK 15,000 as from 1 June 2019 until the date of effective payment;
c. on CZK 15,000 as from 1 July 2019 until the date of effective payment;
d. on CZK 15,000 as from 1 August 2019 until the date of effective payment;
e. on CZK 30,000 as from 1 September 2019 until the date of effective payment;
f. on CZK 30,000 as from 1 October 2019 until the date of effective payment.
33.
Having established that the Respondent is to be held liable for the early termination
of the employment contract with just cause by the Claimant, the Chamber focused its
attention on the consequences of such termination. Taking into consideration art. 17
par. 1 of the Regulations, the Chamber decided that the Claimant would, in principle,
be entitled to receive from the Respondent an amount of money as compensation for
breach of contract.
34.
In continuation, the Chamber focused its attention on the calculation of the amount
of compensation for breach of contract in the case at stake. In doing so, the members
of the Chamber firstly recapitulated that, in accordance with art. 17 par. 1 of the
Regulations, the amount of compensation shall be calculated, in particular and unless
otherwise provided for in the contract at the basis of the dispute, with due
consideration for the law of the country concerned, the specificity of sport and further
objective criteria, including, in particular, the remuneration and other benefits due to
the Claimant under the existing contract and/or the new contract, the time remaining
on the existing contract up to a maximum of five years, and depending on whether
the contractual breach falls within the protected period.
35.
In application of the relevant provision, the Chamber held that it first of all had to
clarify as to whether the pertinent employment contract contains a provision by
means of which the parties had beforehand agreed upon an amount of compensation
payable by the contractual parties in the event of breach of contract. In this regard,
the Chamber established that no such compensation clause was included in the
employment contract at the basis of the matter at stake.
Player Lucas de Carvalho Serra, Brazil / Club FC Hlucin, Czech Republic
Page 10 of 14
36.
As a consequence, the members of the Chamber determined that the amount of
compensation payable by the Respondent to the Claimant had to be assessed in
application of the other parameters set out in art. 17 par. 1 of the Regulations. The
Chamber recalled that said provision provides for a non-exhaustive enumeration of
criteria to be taken into consideration when calculating the amount of compensation
payable. Therefore, other objective criteria may be taken into account at the
discretion of the deciding body. In this regard, the Dispute Resolution Chamber
emphasised beforehand that each request for compensation for contractual breach
has to be assessed by the Chamber on a case-by-case basis taking into account all
specific circumstances of the respective matter.
37.
The Chamber then turned its attention to the remuneration and other benefits due
to the Claimant under the existing contract and/or the new contract, which criterion
was considered by the Chamber to be essential. The members of the Chamber deemed
it important to emphasise that the wording of art. 17 par. 1 of the Regulations allows
the Chamber to take into account both the existing contract and the new contract, if
any, in the calculation of the amount of compensation.
38.
Bearing in mind the foregoing, the Chamber proceeded with the calculation of the
monies payable to the player under the terms of the employment contract as from
the date of termination with just cause by the Claimant until its natural expiration,
bearing in mind that he would have received in total CZK 690,000 as remuneration
for the period as from February 2020 until 31 December 2021. Consequently, the
Chamber concluded that the amount of CZK 690,000 serves as the basis for the final
determination of the amount of compensation for breach of contract in the case at
hand.
39.
In continuation, the Chamber verified as to whether the Claimant had signed an
employment contract with another club during the relevant period of time, by means
of which he would have been enabled to reduce his loss of income. According to the
constant practice of the DRC, such remuneration under a new employment contract
shall be taken into account in the calculation of the amount of compensation for
breach of contract in connection with the player’s general obligation to mitigate his
damages.
40.
In this respect, the Chamber recalled that the Claimant had concluded a new
employment contract with the Czech club, SC Znojmo, valid as from 1 March 2020 until
30 June 2020, whose remuneration during the overlapping period shall be deducted,
leading to a mitigated compensation in the amount of CZK 650,000.
41.
Furthermore, taking into account art. 17 par.1 (ii), the DRC recalled that it had found
that the Claimant had unilaterally terminated the contract due to overdue payables
and took note that the player had been able to mitigate his damages. Consequently,
the Chamber decided that the Claimant should in principle be entitled to an additional
compensation in the amount of CZK 90,000 corresponding to the equivalent of 3
Player Lucas de Carvalho Serra, Brazil / Club FC Hlucin, Czech Republic
Page 11 of 14
monthly salaries. However, in accordance with said provision, as the overall
compensation would exceed the residual value, the DRC deemed that the Claimant
should be awarded as final compensation the residual value of the contract, i.e. CZK
690,000.
42.
In this respect, the Chamber recalled that the Claimant limited his compensation to
CZK 650,000. Consequently the Chamber decided to award CZK 650,000 as final
compensation to the Claimant.
43.
In addition, taking into account the Claimant’s request and the DRC’s well-established
jurisprudence, the Chamber decided that the Respondent must pay to the Claimant
interest of 5% p.a. on the amount of CZK 650,000 as of the date on which the claim
was lodged, i.e. 9 March 2020, until the date of effective payment.
44.
The DRC concluded its deliberations by establishing that the Claimant’s claim is
partially accepted and by rejecting any further claim of the Claimant.
45.
Furthermore, taking into account the consideration under number II./12. above, the
Chamber referred to par. 1 and 2 of art. 24bis 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.
46.
In this regard, the Chamber established that, in virtue of the aforementioned
provision, it has competence to impose a sanction on the Respondent. More in
particular, the DRC pointed out that, against clubs, the sanction shall consist in a ban
from registering any new players, either nationally or internationally, up until the due
amount is paid and for the maximum duration of three entire and consecutive
registration periods.
47.
Therefore, bearing in mind the above, the DRC decided that, in the event that the
Respondent does not pay the amount due to the Claimant within 45 days as from the
moment in which the Claimant, following the notification of the present decision,
communicates the relevant bank details to the Respondent, a ban from registering
any new players, either nationally or internationally, for the maximum duration of
three entire and consecutive registration periods shall become effective on the
Respondent in accordance with art. 24bis par. 2 and 4 of the Regulations.
48.
Finally, the Chamber recalled that the above-mentioned sanction will be lifted
immediately and prior to its complete serving upon payment of the due amounts, in
accordance with art. 24bis par. 3 of the Regulations.
Player Lucas de Carvalho Serra, Brazil / Club FC Hlucin, Czech Republic
Page 12 of 14
III.
Decis ion of the Dis pute Res olution Cham ber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Lucas de Carvalho Serra, is admissible.
2.
The claim of the Claimant is partially accepted.
3.
The Respondent, FC Hlucin, has to pay to the Claimant outstanding remuneration in
the amount of Czech Koruna (CZK) 120,000 plus interest at the rate of 5% p.a. as
follows:
a. 5% p.a. on CZK 15,000 as from 1 May 2019 until the date of effective payment;
b. 5% p.a. on CZK 15,000 as from 1 June 2019 until the date of effective payment;
c. 5% p.a. on CZK 15,000 as from 1 July 2019 until the date of effective payment;
d. 5% p.a. on CZK 15,000 as from 1 August 2019 until the date of effective payment;
e. 5% p.a. on CZK 30,000 as from 1 September 2019 until the date of effective
payment;
f. 5% p.a. on CZK 30,000 as from 1 October 2019 until the date of effective payment.
4.
The Respondent has to pay to the Claimant compensation for breach of contract in the
amount of CZK 650,000, plus 5% interest p.a. as from 9 March 2020 until the date of
effective payment.
5.
Any further claim of the Claimant is rejected.
6.
The Claimant is directed to inform the Respondent, immediately and directly,
preferably to the e-mail address as indicated on the cover letter of the present decision,
of the relevant bank account to which the Respondent must pay the amounts
mentioned under point 3. and 4. above.
7.
The Respondent shall provide evidence of payment of the due amount in accordance
with point 3. and 4. above to FIFA to the e-mail address [email protected], duly
translated, if need be, into one of the official FIFA languages (English, French, German,
Spanish).
8.
In the event that the amounts due plus interest in accordance with point 3. and 4. above
are not paid by the Respondent w ithin 45 day s as from the notification by the
Claimant of the relevant bank details to the Respondent, the Respondent shall be
banned from registering any new players, either nationally or internationally, up until
the due amount is paid and for the maximum duration of three entire and consecutive
registration periods (cf. art. 24bis of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of
Players).
Player Lucas de Carvalho Serra, Brazil / Club FC Hlucin, Czech Republic
Page 13 of 14
9.
The ban mentioned in point 8. above will be lifted immediately and prior to its
complete serving, once the due amounts are paid.
10. In the event that the aforementioned sums plus interest are still not paid by the end of
the ban of three entire and consecutive registration periods, the present matter shall
be submitted, upon request, to FIFA’s Disciplinary Committee for consideration and a
formal decision.
*****
Note related to the publication:
The FIFA administration may publish decisions issued by the Players’ Status Committee or
the DRC. Where such decisions contain confidential information, 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 Rules Governing the Procedures
of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber).
Note related to the appeal procedure:
According to art. 58 par. 1 of the FIFA Statutes, this decision may be appealed against
before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The statement of appeal must be sent to
the CAS directly within 21 days of receipt of notification of this decision and shall contain
all the elements in accordance with point 2 of the directives issued by the CAS. Within
another 10 days following the expiry of the time limit for filing the statement of appeal,
the appellant shall file a brief stating the facts and legal arguments giving rise to the appeal
with the CAS.
The full address and contact numbers of the CAS are the following:
Court of Arbitration for Sport
Avenue de Beaumont 2
1012 Lausanne
Switzerland
Tel: +41 21 613 50 00
Fax: +41 21 613 50 01
e-mail: [email protected]
www.tas-cas.org
For the Dispute Resolution Chamber:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
Player Lucas de Carvalho Serra, Brazil / Club FC Hlucin, Czech Republic
Page 14 of 14