F.I.F.A. – Camera di Risoluzione delle Controversie (2012-2013) – controversie di lavoro – ———- F.I.F.A. – Dispute Resolution Chamber (2012-2013) – labour disputes – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 27 February 2013, in the following composition: Geoff Thompson (England), Chairman Rinaldo Martorelli (Brazil), member Takuya Yamazaki (Japan), member Essa M. Saleh Al-Housani (UAE), member Theodoros Giannikos (Greece), member on the claim presented by the player, Player I, from country S, as Claimant against the club, Club B, from country T, as Respondent regarding an employment-related dispute arisen between the parties

F.I.F.A. - Camera di Risoluzione delle Controversie (2012-2013) - controversie di lavoro - ---------- F.I.F.A. - Dispute Resolution Chamber (2012-2013) - labour disputes – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 27 February 2013, in the following composition: Geoff Thompson (England), Chairman Rinaldo Martorelli (Brazil), member Takuya Yamazaki (Japan), member Essa M. Saleh Al-Housani (UAE), member Theodoros Giannikos (Greece), member on the claim presented by the player, Player I, from country S, as Claimant against the club, Club B, from country T, as Respondent regarding an employment-related dispute arisen between the parties I. Facts of the case 1. On 28 July 2009, Player I, from country S (hereinafter: player or Claimant) and the Club B, from country T (hereinafter: club or Respondent), signed an employment contract valid as from 28 July 2009 until 31 May 2011 (hereinafter: contract). 2. According to the contract, the player was entitled to receive, apart from fringe benefits, for the 2009/10 season the following amounts: • Monthly salary as from August 2009 to May 2010 (EUR 40,000 X 10 instalments) EUR 400,000 • Lump sum, payable on 31 October 2009 EUR 100,000 • Bonus if the player is nominated in the squad of 11 in 30 official games during the season EUR 70,000 • Extra amount*, if the club completes the season qualified between the third and fifth place EUR 30,000 • Extra amount*, if the club completes the season between the first and second place EUR 50,000 *The highest amount would be paid to the player in case he deserves more than one of these extra payments. 3. Furthermore, apart from fringe benefits, the player was entitled to receive for the 2010/11 season the following amounts: • Monthly salary as from August 2010 to May 2011 (EUR 40,000 X 10 instalments) EUR 400,000 • Lump sum, payable on 31 July 2010 EUR 100,000 • Lump sum, payable on 31 October 2010 EUR 100,000 • Bonus if the player is nominated in the squad of 11 in 30 official games during the season EUR 100,000 • Extra amount*, if the club completes the season between the third and fifth place EUR 50,000 • Extra amount*, if the club completes the season between the first and second place EUR 50,000 *The highest amount would be paid to the player in case he deserves more than one of these extra payments. 4. On 14 May 2012, the player lodged a claim against the club in front of FIFA, sustaining that the club did not comply with its obligations and failed to pay him the amount of EUR 70,000 relating to the bonus granted to the player for playing more than 30 games in the squad of 11 during the 2009/10 season (hereinafter: participation bonus). 5. Therefore, the player requested that the club be ordered to pay the sum of EUR 70,000 plus 5% interest per annum as of the date of the last match of the 2009/10 ``country T league’’, i.e. 16 May 2010. 6. The player explained that, in a telephone conference of 17 February 2012, the club had stated that the player had fulfilled the contractual prerequisite for the entitlement to the participation bonus. 7. However, the player maintained that the club refused to effect the payment of the EUR 70,000, as it considered that the payment of an extra bonus of USD 150,000 for having won the country T league in the 2009/10 season (hereinafter: league bonus) to the player, which bonus, according to the player, was not stipulated in the contract, cancels his entitlement to the participation bonus. 8. Moreover, the player sustained that the league bonus was paid to all players in the team as a bonus for the club being the winner of the 2009/10 country T league and that it is independent from the participation bonus. 9. In addition, the player deemed that a voluntary payment of a special bonus which is paid to every player in the team does not alter in any way the other contractual obligations of the club. 10. In its response to the claim, the club argued that all remuneration and bonuses under the contract were paid to the player, including the participation bonus of EUR 70,000, and requested that the player’s claim be rejected. Furthermore, the club, in support of its position, presented several bank documents that correspond to the payments made by the club to the player as from 28 July 2009 to 30 December 2011, which amount to a total of EUR 1,370,000 and which included a payment of USD 150,000 on 3 August 2010. 11. In his replica, taking into account the club’s position, the player insisted that the club be ordered to pay the sum of EUR 70,000 plus 5% interest per annum as of 16 May 2010. 12. In its duplica, the club reiterated its position. 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. In this respect, it took note that the present matter was submitted to FIFA on 14 May 2012. Consequently, the Rules Governing the Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber (edition 2008; hereinafter: Procedural Rules) are applicable to the matter at hand (cf. art. 21 par. 2 and 3 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 (edition 2012) 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 country S player and a country T club. 3. Furthermore, 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. 26 par. 1 and 2 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (editions 2012 and 2010), and considering that the present claim was lodged on 14 May 2012, the 2010 edition of said regulations (hereinafter: Regulations) is applicable to the matter at hand as to the substance. 4. The competence of the Chamber and the applicable regulations having been established, the Chamber entered into the substance of the matter. The members of the Chamber started by acknowledging the facts of the case, as well as the documentation contained in the file. In this respect, the Chamber recalled that the parties had signed an employment contract, valid as from 28 July 2009 until 31 May 2011. Furthermore, the Chamber noted that in accordance with the terms and conditions of the contract, the Claimant’s maximum possible total remuneration for the 2009/2010 season was EUR 620,000 and EUR 750,000 for the 2010/2011 season. 5. In this context, the Chamber noted that the Claimant based his claim on the employment contract, according to which he was to receive from the Respondent EUR 70,000 in the event of being nominated in the squad of eleven for thirty games during the 2009/2010 season. 6. In continuation, the members of the Chamber took into account that the Claimant’s entitlement to the participation bonus was not disputed by the Respondent. Moreover, the Chamber duly noted that, according to the Respondent, all remuneration and bonuses under the contract, including said participation bonus, have in fact been paid to the Claimant. 7. The DRC then turned its attention to the arguments of the Claimant and acknowledged that according to the latter, the Respondent failed to effect the payment of the participation bonus, i.e. EUR 70,000, on account of an extra bonus in the amount of USD 150,000, which was allegedly paid to the Claimant for having won the country T league in the 2009/10 season and which, apparently, was not stipulated in the contract. 8. In this context, the members of the Chamber observed that the Respondent had submitted documentary evidence demonstrating that, in fact, it had paid remuneration to the Claimant in the total amount of EUR 1,370,000, which corresponds to the entire value of the employment contract signed between the parties. 9. In continuation, the Chamber proceeded with a thorough examination of the documentation submitted by the Claimant in connection with his allegations relating to the amount of USD 150,000, which he claims having received for having won the country T league in the 2009/10 season. In this respect, and referring to 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, the Chamber noted that the Claimant failed to submit documentary evidence demonstrating that the amount of USD 150,000 paid to him by the Respondent corresponds to an additional bonus which was allegedly verbally agreed upon between the parties. 10. On account of the above, the members of the Chamber concurred that the Claimant failed to submit evidence corroborating his allegation that the Respondent still owes him the amount of EUR 70,000 in connection with the participation bonus for playing more than thirty games in the squad of eleven during the 2009/2010 season. 11. Consequently, the Chamber decided to reject the claim of the Claimant. III. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber The claim of the Claimant, Player I, is rejected. ** Note relating to the motivated decision (legal remedy): According to art. 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: info@tas-cas.org www.tas-cas.org For the Dispute Resolution Chamber: Jérôme Valcke Secretary General Encl.: CAS directives