Labour Disputes
Texto da decisão
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) judge
passed on 8 July 2015,
by Theo van Seggelen (Netherlands), DRC judge,
on the claim presented by the player,
Player A, country B
as Claimant
against the club,
Club C, country D
as Respondent
regarding an employment-related dispute
between the parties in connection with overdue payables
I.
Facts of the case
1.
On 27 January 2014, the player from country B, Player A (hereinafter:
Claimant), and the club from country D, Club C (hereinafter: Respondent)
signed an employment contract valid as from the date of signature until 30
June 2015.
2.
Thereafter, on 27 August 2014, the Claimant and the Respondent mutually
agreed upon the termination of the employment contract and, in
consequence, concluded a settlement agreement by means of which the
Respondent undertook to pay the amount of EUR 4,500 to the Claimant by 20
October 2014.
3.
On 14 April 2015, the Claimant lodged a claim against the Respondent in front
of FIFA asking that the Respondent be ordered to pay to him overdue payables
in the amount of EUR 4,500 corresponding to the full amount agreed in the
settlement agreement.
4.
By correspondence dated 24 April 2015, the Claimant put the Respondent in
default of payment of the amount of EUR 4,500 setting a deadline of 10 days
in order to remedy the default.
5.
The Claimant further asks to be awarded interest at a rate of 5% p.a. as of 14
April 2015 as well as legal costs.
6.
In spite of having been invited to do so, the Respondent has not replied to the
claim.
II.
Considerations of the DRC judge
1.
First of all, the DRC judge analysed whether he was competent to deal with
the matter at hand. In this respect, he took note that the present matter was
submitted to FIFA on 14 April 2015. Consequently, the Rules Governing the
Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution
Chamber (edition 2015; hereinafter: Procedural Rules) are applicable to the
matter at hand (cf. art. 21 of the Procedural Rules).
Player A, country B / Club C, country D
Page 2 of 6
2.
Subsequently, the DRC judge referred to art. 3 par. 2 and par. 3 of the
Procedural Rules and confirmed that in accordance with art. 24 par. 1 and par.
2 in conjunction with art. 22 lit. b of the Regulations on the Status and
Transfer of Players (edition 2015) he is competent to deal with the matter at
stake, which concerns an employment-related dispute with an international
dimension between a player from country B and a club from country D.
3.
Furthermore, the DRC 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 par. 2 of the Regulations on the Status and
Transfer of Players (2015), and considering that the present claim was lodged
on 14 April 2015, the 2015 edition of said regulations (hereinafter:
Regulations) is applicable to the matter at hand as to the substance.
4.
The competence of the DRC judge and the applicable regulations having been
established, the DRC judge entered into the substance of the matter. In this
respect, the DRC judge started by acknowledging all the above-mentioned
facts as well as the arguments and the documentation on file. However, the
DRC 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.
5.
Having said this, the DRC judge acknowledged that the Claimant and the
Respondent signed an employment contract valid as of 27 January 2014 until
30 June 2015. Moreover, the DRC judge acknowledged that the employment
contract was mutually terminated on 27 August 2014 by means of the
settlement agreement signed by both parties, according to which the
Respondent undertook to pay the Claimant the amount of EUR 4,500 by 20
October 2014.
6.
The DRC judge further noted that the Claimant subsequently lodged a claim
against the Respondent in front of FIFA, maintaining that the Respondent has
overdue payables towards him in the total amount of EUR 4,500 corresponding
to the full amount agreed in the settlement agreement.
7.
In this context, the DRC judge took particular note of the fact that, on 24 April
2015, the Claimant put the Respondent in default of payment of the
aforementioned amount, setting a time limit of 10 days in order to remedy the
default.
8.
Consequently, the DRC judge concluded that the Claimant had duly proceeded
in accordance with art. 12bis par. 3 of the Regulations, which stipulates that
Player A, country B / Club C, country D
Page 3 of 6
the creditor (player or club) must have put the debtor club in default in writing
and have granted a deadline of at least ten days for the debtor club to comply
with its financial obligation(s).
9.
Subsequently, the DRC judge took into account that the Respondent, for its
part, failed to present its response to the claim of the Claimant, in spite of
having been invited to do so. In this way, the DRC judge considered that the
Respondent renounced its right to defence and thus accepted the allegations
of the Claimant.
10.
Furthermore, as a consequence of the aforementioned consideration, the DRC
judge concurred that in accordance with art. 9 par. 3 of the Procedural Rules
he shall take a decision upon the basis of the documents on file, in other
words, upon the statements and documents presented by the Claimant.
11.
Having said this, the DRC judge acknowledged that, in accordance with the
settlement agreement provided by the Claimant, the Respondent was obliged
to pay to the Claimant the amount of EUR 4,500.
12.
Taking into account the documentation presented by the Claimant in support
of his petition, the DRC judge concluded that the Claimant had substantiated
his claim pertaining to overdue payables with sufficient documentary evidence.
13.
On account of the aforementioned considerations, the DRC judge established
that the Respondent failed to remit the Claimant’s remuneration in the total
amount of EUR 4,500 corresponding to the full amount agreed in the
settlement agreement.
14.
In addition, the DRC judge established that the Respondent had delayed a due
payment for more than 30 days without a prima facie contractual basis.
15.
Consequently, the DRC judge decided that, in accordance with the general
legal principle of pacta sunt servanda, the Respondent is liable to pay to the
Claimant overdue payables in the total amount of EUR 4,500.
16.
In addition, taking into account the Claimant’s request as well as the constant
practice of the Dispute Resolution Chamber, the DRC judge decided that the
Respondent must pay to the Claimant interest of 5% p.a. on the amount of
EUR 4,500 as from 14 April 2015 until the date of effective payment.
17.
In continuation, taking into account the consideration under number II./14.
above, the DRC judge referred to art.12bis par. 2 of the Regulations which
Player A, country B / Club C, country D
Page 4 of 6
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.
18.
The DRC judge established that by virtue of art. 12bis par. 4 of the Regulations
he has competence to impose sanctions on the Respondent. Bearing in mind
that the Respondent did not reply to the claim of the Claimant and that the
Respondent has previously been found to have neglected its contractual
obligations towards players, the DRC judge decided to impose a fine on the
Respondent in accordance with art. 12bis par. 4 lit. c) of the Regulations.
Furthermore, taking into consideration the amount due of EUR 4,500, the DRC
judge regarded a fine amounting to CHF 2,000 as appropriate and hence
decided to impose said fine on the Respondent.
19.
In this connection, the DRC judge wished to highlight 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.
20.
Finally, the DRC judge rejected the Claimant’s request for legal costs in
accordance with art. 18 par. 4 of the Procedural Rules.
III.
Decision of the DRC judge
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Player A, is partially accepted.
2.
The Respondent, Club C, has to pay to the Claimant, within 30 days as from the
date of notification of this decision, overdue payables in the amount of EUR
4,500, plus interest at the rate of 5% p.a. as from 14 April 2015 until the date
of effective payment.
3.
In the event that the amount due to the Claimant is not paid by the
Respondent within the stated time limit, the present matter shall be
submitted, upon request, to the FIFA Disciplinary Committee for consideration
and a formal decision.
4.
The Claimant is directed to inform the Respondent immediately and directly of
the account number to which the remittance is to be made and to notify the
DRC judge of every payment received.
5.
Any further claim lodged by the Claimant is rejected.
Player A, country B / Club C, country D
Page 5 of 6
6.
The Respondent is ordered to pay a fine in the amount of
CHF 2,000. The fine is to be paid within 30 days of notification of the present
decision to FIFA to the following bank account with reference to case nr.:
UBS Zurich
Account number 366.677.01U (FIFA Players’ Status)
Clearing number 230
IBAN: CH27 0023 0230 3666 7701U
SWIFT: UBSWCHZH80A
*****
Note relating to the motivated decision (legal remedy):
According to article 67 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, a copy of which we enclose hereto. 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 (cf. point 4 of the directives).
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 DRC judge:
Jérôme Valcke
Secretary General
Encl: CAS directives
Player A, country B / Club C, country D
Page 6 of 6