F.I.F.A. – Camera di Risoluzione delle Controversie (2013-2014) – controversie di lavoro – ———- F.I.F.A. – Dispute Resolution Chamber (2013-2014) – labour disputes – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber(DRC) judge passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 13 September 2013, by DRC judge, on the claim presented by the player, Player S, from country R as Claimant against the club, Club M , from country F as Respondent regarding an employment-related dispute between the parties

F.I.F.A. - Camera di Risoluzione delle Controversie (2013-2014) - controversie di lavoro - ---------- F.I.F.A. - Dispute Resolution Chamber (2013-2014) - labour disputes – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber(DRC) judge passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 13 September 2013, by DRC judge, on the claim presented by the player, Player S, from country R as Claimant against the club, Club M , from country F as Respondent regarding an employment-related dispute between the parties I. Facts of the case 1. On 22 August 2012, player S from country R(hereinafter: the player or Claimant), club M from country F (hereinafter: the club or Respondent) concluded an employment contract (hereinafter: the contract) valid as from 22 August 2012 until 30 May 2013 as well as a “supplementary agreement for contract of employment” for the same period of time. 2. In accordance with the contract, the player was entitled to EUR 20,000 payable in ten monthly installments of EUR 2,000, the first one payable on 20 September 2012 and the last one payable on 20 June 2013. 3. In accordance with the supplementary agreement, the player was to receive: “A) In consideration of the services to be rendered by the Player according to the agreement dated 22/08/2012 and in addition to the salary payable to the player under the said agreement the Employer shall pay to the Player the additional sum of EUR 50,000, making a total of EUR 70,000 for the whole of the employment period, the first payment payable according to the present agreement on the 20th of September 2012 for the additional amount of EUR 5,000 and thereafter the additional amount of EUR 5,000 on the 20th of each following working month until the end of the employment period 2012-2013. (…) It is agreed by both parties that the total amount payable by the present contract dated 22/08/2012 will be no more than EUR 70,000 net total for both agreements. The player accepts to give to the Employer grace period of thirty days to pay his working additional month. B) The player will receive from the whole amount EUR 10,000 with the contract signing. C) The player will receive another EUR 5,000 if the team stays in the first division. D) The player will receive another EUR 5,000 if the team enters in position 5-8. E) The player will receive another EUR 10,000 if the team enters in position 1-4” 4. On 11 May 2013, the player lodged a claim before FIFA against the club indicating that he was entitled to a monthly salary of EUR 7,000 as well as to a signing fee of EUR 10,000 payable on 22 August 2012. 5. However, the Claimant indicated that since September 2012 the club had failed to pay him his salaries and, therefore, after several oral reminders, the player sent a letter to the club on 21 January 2013 requesting the club to pay the outstanding amounts within 48 hours. Since no payment was received, the player terminated his contract by means of a letter sent to the club on 24 January 2013. 6. On account of the above, the Claimant requested to be awarded with the amount of EUR 71,500 plus 5% interest as follows: - For the salaries of September, October, November and December 2012 as from the due dates; - For the remaining salaries “as from 15th January 2013 regarding the rest of the salaries until total and effective payment is made”. 7. Although having been invited by FIFA to provide its position to the claim of the player by no later than 8 July 2013, the Respondent only replied to the claim on 12 August 2013 after the investigation-phase had already been concluded. 8. Upon request of the FIFA administration, the Claimant informed FIFA that he did not enter into any new employment relationship between January and July 2013. II. Considerations of the DRC judge 1. First of all, the DRC judge analysed whether he was competent to deal with the case at hand. In this respect, the DRC judge took note that the present matter was submitted to FIFA on 11 May 2013. Consequently, the DRC judge concluded that the 2012 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 DRC judge referred to art. 3 par. 2 and 3 of the Procedural Rules and confirmed that in accordance with art. 24 par. 1 and 2 lit. i. in combination with art. 22 lit. b) of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2012), he is competent to decide on the present matter, which concerns an employment-related dispute with an international dimension between a player S and a club §M. 3. Furthermore, the DRC judge analysed 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, he confirmed that in accordance with art. 26 par. 1 and 2 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2012) and considering that the present claim was lodged in front of FIFA on 11 May 2013, the 2012 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. 4. The competence of the DRC judge and the applicable regulations having been established, the DRC judge entered into the substance of the matter. The DRC judge started by acknowledging the above-mentioned facts as well as the documentation contained in the file. 5. First of all, the DRC judge acknowledged that the Claimant and the Respondent concluded an employment contract as well as a supplementary agreement both valid as from 22 August 2012 until 30 May 2013. 6. Equally, the DRC judge duly noted that the Claimant asserted that the Respondent had not paid him his salaries of September, October November and December 2012, and that, although having sent a default letter, the Respondent did not fulfil its contractual obligations. As a result, the Claimant informed the Respondent on 24 January 2013 that he terminated the contract. 7. In this regard, the DRC judge duly noted that, on account of the above, the Claimant is seeking payment of the amount EUR 71,500 plus 5% interest. 8. Subsequently, the DRC judge observed that the Respondent, for its part, in spite of having been invited to do so, failed to present its response to the claim of the Claimant within the relevant time-limit. In fact, the reply of the Respondent was only received after the investigation-phase of the matter had already been concluded. As a result, the DRC judge decided not to take into account the reply of the Respondent and established that, in accordance with art. 9 par. 3 of the Procedural Rules, he shall take a decision upon the basis of those documents on file that were provided prior to the closure of the investigation-phase, in casu, upon the statements and documents presented by the Claimant. 9. In view of all the above, the DRC judge concluded that it could be established that the Respondent had failed to pay to the Claimant his salaries in the amount of EUR 29,500 corresponding to the salaries of September until December 2012. 10. Having taken into consideration the previous considerations, the DRC judge decided that the Respondent had seriously neglected its contractual obligations and, therefore, determined that the Claimant had terminated the employment contract with just cause on 24 January 2013, i.e. the date on which he informed the Respondent of the termination of the contract. 11. Thus, the DRC judge established that the Claimant had terminated the employment contract with just cause on 24 January 2013 and that, consequently, the Respondent is to be held liable for the early termination of the employment contact with just cause by the Claimant 12. Bearing in mind the previous considerations, the DRC judge went on to deal with the consequences of the early termination of the employment contract with just cause by the Claimant. 13. First of all, the DRC judge decided that the Respondent must fulfill its obligations as per employment contract in accordance with the general legal principle of “pacta sunt servanda”. Consequently, the DRC judge decided that the Respondent is liable to pay to the Claimant the remuneration that was outstanding at the time of the termination, i.e. the amount of EUR 29,500. 14. In continuation, the DRC judge decided that, taking into consideration art. 17 par. 1 of the Regulations, the Claimant is entitled to receive from the Respondent compensation for breach of contract in addition to any outstanding salaries on the basis of the relevant employment contract. 15. In this context, the DRC judge outlined that, in accordance with said provision, 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. 16. In application of the relevant provision, the DRC judge held that he first of all had to clarify whether the pertinent employment contract contained any clause by means of which the parties had beforehand agreed upon a compensation payable by the contractual parties in the event of breach of contract. In this regard, the DRC judge established that no such compensation clause was included in the employment contract at the basis of the matter at stake. 17. Having recalled the aforementioned, and in order to evaluate the compensation to be paid by the Respondent, the DRC judge took into account the remuneration due to the Claimant in accordance with the employment contract as well as the time remaining on the same contract, along with the professional situation of the Claimant after the early termination occurred. In this respect, the DRC judge took into account that the remaining value of the contract as from its early termination by the Claimant until the regular expiry of the contract amounts to EUR 42,000 and that such amount shall serve as the basis for the final determination of the amount of compensation for breach of contract. 18. In continuation, the DRC judge remarked that the Claimant had not find new employment after the termination of the contract until the expiry of the original contract concluded with the Respondent. 19. In view of all of the above, the DRC judge decided that the Respondent must pay the amount of EUR 42,000 to the Claimant, which is considered by the DRC judge to be reasonable and justified amount as compensation for breach of contract. 20. As a consequence, the DRC judge decided that the Respondent is liable to pay the total amount of EUR 71,500 to the Claimant, consisting of the amount of EUR 29,500 corresponding to the Claimant’s outstanding remuneration at the time of the termination of the contract by the Claimant and the amount of EUR 42,000 corresponding to compensation for breach of contract. 21. In continuation and with regard to the Claimant's request for interest, the DRC judge decided that the Claimant is entitled to receive interest at the rate of 5% p.a. on the amount of EUR 29,500 as from the respective due dates and on the amount of EUR 42,000 as from 13 September 2013. 22. The DRC judge concluded his deliberations in the present matter by rejecting any further claim of the Claimant. III. Decision of the DRC judge 1. The claim of the Claimant, player S, is partially accepted. 2. The Respondent, club M, has to pay to the Claimant, within 30 days as from the date of notification of this decision, outstanding remuneration in the amount of EUR 29,500 plus 5% interest until the date of effective payment as follows: a. 5% p.a. as of 23 August 2012 on the amount of EUR 10,000; b. 5% p.a. as of 1 November 2012 on the amount of EUR 5,500; c. 5% p.a. as of 1 December 2012 on the amount of EUR 7,000; d. 5% p.a. as of 1 January 2013 on the amount of EUR 7,000. 3. The Respondent has to pay to the Claimant, within 30 days as from the date of notification of this decision, compensation for breach of contract in the amount of EUR 42,000 plus 5% interest p.a. on said amount as from 13 September 2013 until the date of effective payment. 4. In the event that the amounts due to the Claimant in accordance with the above-mentioned numbers 2. and 3. are not paid by the Respondent within the stated time limits, the present matter shall be submitted, upon request, to the FIFA Disciplinary Committee for consideration and a formal decision. 5. Any further claim lodged by the Claimant is rejected. 6. 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 Dispute Resolution Chamber of every payment received. ***** 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: info@tas-cas.org www.tas-cas.org For the DRC judge: Jérôme Valcke Secretary General Encl. CAS Directives