F.I.F.A. – Camera di Risoluzione delle Controversie (2015-2016) – controversie di lavoro – ———- F.I.F.A. – Dispute Resolution Chamber (2015-2016) – labour disputes – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 13 August 2015, in the following composition: Geoff Thompson (Engand), Chairman Mario Gallavotti (Italy), member Jon Newman (USA), member 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 arisen between the parties

F.I.F.A. - Camera di Risoluzione delle Controversie (2015-2016) - controversie di lavoro – ---------- F.I.F.A. - Dispute Resolution Chamber (2015-2016) - labour disputes – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 13 August 2015, in the following composition: Geoff Thompson (Engand), Chairman Mario Gallavotti (Italy), member Jon Newman (USA), member 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 arisen between the parties I. Facts of the case 1. On 7 September 2011, the Player of Country B, Player A (hereinafter: the Claimant), and the Club of Country D, Club C (hereinafter: the Respondent), concluded an employment contract (hereinafter: the contract) valid as from 6 September 2011 until 30 June 2014. The contract also provides for an automatic extension for one more season, i.e. season 2014-2015, in the event the Claimant participates in at least 50% of official matches during the season 2013-2014. 2. On the same date, the parties signed a “Schedule” (hereinafter: the appendix) relating the Claimant’s remuneration. 3. Pursuant to the appendix, the Claimant is to receive the following fixedremuneration:  EUR 1,200,000 net due at the beginning of each sporting season;  EUR 2,000,000 net per season as total salary payable in 10 monthly instalments of EUR 200,000 each, from August through May. 4. The appendix also foresees that the Claimant is to receive the following bonuses, “calculated at the end of each season and payable by the 1st of July”: a) EUR 15,000 net for each official match played with a minimum of 45 minutes of appearance; b) EUR 100,000 net every 10 goals scored during official matches; c) EUR 100,000 in the event the Claimant wins the Top Striker of the League Award; d) EUR 100,000 in the event the Claimant wins the Most Valuable Player (MVP) Award; e) EUR 100,000 in the event the Respondent wins the League of Country D; f) EUR 150,000 in the event the Respondent wins the Cup E; g) EUR 50,000 in the event the Respondent wins the Cup F; h) EUR 500,000 in the event the Respondent wins the League G. 5. In addition, the appendix states that the Claimant is entitled to a villa, a car and 21 flight tickets in business class for him and his family. 6. On 11 March 2015, the Claimant lodged a claim before FIFA against the Respondent, requesting the amount of EUR 5,101,661, broken-down as follows:  EUR 2,326,661 net as outstanding remuneration, plus 5% interest p.a. as of the due date of each payment;  EUR 2,560,000 net as damages corresponding to the loss of a chance to have the contract renewed for the season 2014-2015;  EUR 200,000 net as moral damages;  EUR 15,000 as legal costs. With regard to the outstanding amounts, the Claimant deems that all payments made by the Respondent during the term of the contract shall be “charged” to the unpaid salaries and bonuses, starting with the oldest outstanding amounts. The Respondent is thus deemed to have paid all due amounts for the seasons 2011-2012 and 2012-2013, so that the Claimant’s remuneration for the season 2013-2014 remains due. 7. Prior thereto, on 16, 17 and 18 June 2014, the Claimant put the Respondent in default for outstanding payments amounting to EUR 2,665,671, corresponding to EUR 1,108,054 for the season 2011-2012, plus EUR 202,000 for the season 2012-2013, plus EUR 1,355,617 for the season 2013-2014. 8. According to the Claimant, by the time he put the Respondent in default, he was entitled to the following amounts:  Season 2011-2012: EUR 4,070,000  EUR 1,200,000 as lump-sum payment due at the beginning of the season;  EUR 2,000,000 as total salary;  EUR 500,000 for winning the “Cup of League G”;  EUR 270,000 as “played games bonus”;  EUR 100,000 as “scored 10 goals in all competitions”.  Season 2012-2013: EUR 2,665,000  EUR 1,200,000 as lump-sum payment due at the beginning of the season;  EUR 1,200,000 as total salary;  EUR 100,000 as “Country D League Win Bonus”;  EUR 165,000 as “played games bonus”.  Season 2013-2014: EUR 3,417,500  EUR 1,200,000 as lump-sum payment due at the beginning of the season;  EUR 2,000,000 as total salary;  EUR 150,000 as “Cup E Champion”;  EUR 67,500 as “played games bonus”. 9. However, the Claimant alleges that the Respondent only paid the following amounts:  Season 2011-2012: EUR 2,961,946  Season 2012-2013: EUR 2,463,000  Season 2013-2014: EUR 2,061,883 10. By means of a correspondence dated 19 June 2014 provided by the Claimant, the Respondent acknowledged owing the Claimant outstanding amounts and stated that it deducted the amount of EUR 75,117 corresponding to the following expenses:  EUR 37,000 corresponding to 50% of the Claimant’s rent from 1 January 2013 to 30 June 2013;  EUR 36,000 corresponding to 50% of the Claimant’s rent from 1 July 2013 until 31 December 2013;  EUR 1,895 as traffic violation charges;  EUR 222 as charges for the Claimant’s resident permit renewal. The Respondent thus considered that it only owed the outstanding amount of EUR 2,265,000, broken-down as follows:  EUR 100,000 as bonus for 10 goals scored in official matches for the season 2011-2012;  EUR 255,000 as bonus for 17 matches played for the season 2011-2012;  EUR 165,000 as bonus for 11 matches played for the season 2012-2013;  EUR 45,000 as bonus for 3 matches played for the season 2013-2014;  EUR 100,000 as bonus for the victory of the League of Country D for the season 2012-2013;  EUR 1,200,000 as lump-sum payment due for the season 2013-2014;  EUR 400,000 as salary for April and May 2014. The Respondent further held that the amount of “EUR 88,339” should also be deducted from the said amount of EUR 2,265,000 as follows:  EUR 29,644 corresponding to 50% of the Claimant’s rent from 1 January 2014 to 31 May 2014;  EUR 30,100 as electricity and water bills;  EUR 16,510 as air condition utility bills;  EUR 12,185 as apartment damage charges. Therefore, the Respondent deemed owing the Claimant the total amount of EUR 2,176,661, after the aforementioned deductions. 11. Finally, reverting to the Claimant’s claim as per the Cup E bonus for the season 2013-2014, the Respondent stated in its aforementioned correspondence that the Claimant is not entitled to such bonus since he was not registered as a professional player in the Official Team list. 12. On 8 August 2014, the Claimant contested inter alia the Respondent’s position regarding the non-payment of the amount of EUR 150,000 as bonus for winning the Cup E in 2013-2014 insofar as according to the contract, said bonus is not subject to any condition. Plus, the Claimant deems that it is a unilateral decision from the Respondent not to register the Claimant as professional in the Official Team list. 13. The Claimant also underlined that the Respondent’s letter is dated 19 June 2014 but was allegedly sent by it on 19 July 2014. The Claimant submitted the “fax send report” dated 19 July 2014. 14. On that basis, the Claimant requested the payment of the amount of EUR 2,326,661 corresponding to EUR 2,176,661 as outstanding salaries and bonuses, plus EUR 150,000 as bonus for winning the Cup E in 2013-2014, granting the Respondent until 15 August 2014 at the latest. However, the Respondent apparently never replied or proceeded to the said payment. 15. In this context, on 24 February 2015, the Claimant ultimately put the Respondent in default for the payment of the said amount of EUR 2,326,661 by 26 February 2015 at the latest. The Claimant’s last attempt however remained unsuccessful. 16. Furthermore, the Claimant asserts that the Respondent is a repeated offender. In this respect, the Claimant provides the following correspondence:  correspondence dated 12 October 2011, i.e. one month after the signature of the contract: the Claimant requested the payment of the outstanding amount of EUR 1,366,000 corresponding to EUR 1,200,000 as lump-sum payment for the season 2011-2012, plus EUR 166,666 as salary for September 2011, plus EUR 36,000 as miscellaneous expenses;  correspondence dated 21 March 2013: the Claimant requested the payment of the outstanding amount of EUR 879,720, corresponding to EUR 870,000 as bonuses and EUR 9,720 as balance of salary for the season 2011-2012;  correspondence dated 2 October 2013: the Claimant requested the payment of the outstanding amount of EUR 2,344,720, corresponding to EUR 879,720 for the season 2011-2012, plus EUR 265,000 for the season 2012-2013, plus EUR 1,200,000 for the season 2013-2014. 17. In addition, the Claimant acknowledges that, as from January 2014, the Respondent did not count him in the list of players participating in the official matches, allegedly in order to preserve him from any risk of injury. In this regard, the Claimant holds that considering his statistics for the seasons 2011-2012 and 2012- 2013, he would have had 80% chance to take part in at least 50% of official matches if he had not been removed from the official list by the Respondent. In this respect, the Claimant provided the statistics for the seasons 2011-2012, 2012-2013 and 2013-2014. 18. In spite of having been invited to do so, the Respondent did not provide its comments pertaining to the matter at stake. II. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber 1. First of all, the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: the Chamber or the 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 11 March 2015. Consequently, the 2015 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 stake (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 (edition 2015), 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 Player of Country B and a Club of Country D. 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 (edition 2015), and considering that the present claim was lodged in front of FIFA on 11 March 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 and the applicable regulations having been established, the Chamber entered into the substance of the present matter. In doing so, it started by acknowledging the abovementioned facts of the matter 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. 5. In this respect, the Chamber acknowledged that, on 7 September 2011, the Claimant and the Respondent entered into a contractual relationship, which was to run from 6 September 2011 until 30 June 2014. The DRC also took into consideration that on the same date, the parties signed the appendix, according to which the Claimant was to receive EUR 1,200,000 at the beginning of each season and EUR 2,000,000 net as total salary per season. The DRC further observed that the appendix also provided for several bonuses “calculated at the end of each season and payable by the 1st of July”. 6. Moreover, the DRC noted that the Claimant contacted FIFA indicating that the Respondent had not fulfilled its contractual obligations of payment, thus, requesting inter alia the outstanding amount of EUR 2,326,661. 7. Subsequently, the DRC noted that the Respondent failed to present its response to the claim of the Claimant, in spite of having been invited to do so. By not presenting its position to the claim, the DRC was of the opinion that the Respondent renounced its right of defence and, thus, accepted the allegations of the Claimant. 8. As a consequence of the aforementioned consideration, the Chamber concurred that, in accordance with art. 9 par. 3 of the Procedural Rules, it shall take a decision upon the basis of the documentation already on file; in other words, upon the statements and documents presented by the Claimant. 9. In casu, the DRC referred to the Respondent’s correspondence dated 19 June 2014, provided by the Claimant, by means of which it clearly acknowledged its debt towards him in the amount of EUR 2,176,661. 10. At this point, the DRC wished to recall the content of art. 25 par. 5 of the Regulations, according to which the DRC shall not hear any case subject to these regulations if more than two years have elapsed since the event giving rise to the dispute. Therefore, the Chamber decided to deduct, from the aforementioned amount of EUR 2,176,661 (cf. point II.9. above), the amount of EUR 355,000, corresponding to EUR 100,000 as bonus for 10 goals scored in official matches for the season 2011-2012 and EUR 255,000 as bonus for 17 matches played for the season 2011-2012, which were barred by the statute of limitations in application of art. 25 par. 5 of the Regulations. 11. The DRC also noted that, according to the Claimant, the Respondent had not paid his bonus of EUR 150,000 for winning the Cup E for the season 2013-2014. In this regard, the Chamber deemed it fit to recall that such bonus was provided in the appendix to the contract and was not subject to any condition additional to winning the Cup E. Therefore, taking into account the documentation provided by the Claimant and in the absence of contestation of the Respondent, the DRC concluded that the amount of EUR 150,000 shall be added to the outstanding amount owed to the Claimant. 12. Moreover, reverting to the Claimant’s claim for damages in the amount of EUR 2,560,000 for the loss of chance to have the contract renewed for the season 2014- 2015, the DRC referred to art. 12 par. 3 of the Procedural Rules and deemed that the Claimant shall carry the burden of proof. In this regard, the Chamber noted that the Claimant acknowledged not having been able to play at least 50% of official matches in the season 2013-2014. The DRC also observed that the Claimant’s allegations related to the Respondent deliberately preventing him from playing during the season 2013-2014 in order to avoid a risk of injury were not sufficiently substantiated. As a consequence, the DRC decided to reject the Claimant’s request in this respect. 13. Consequently, the DRC decided that, in accordance with the general legal principle of pacta sunt servanda, the Respondent is liable to pay to the Claimant outstanding remuneration in the total amount of EUR 1,971,661. 14. In addition, taking into account the Claimant’s request as well as the constant practice of the Dispute Resolution Chamber, the DRC decided that the Respondent must pay to the Claimant interest of 5% p.a. on the amount of EUR 1,971,661 as from 11 March 2015 until the date of effective payment. 15. Moreover, the Chamber rejected any claim for legal expenses and procedural compensation in accordance with art. 18 par. 4 of the Procedural Rules and the Chamber’s respective longstanding jurisprudence in this regard. 16. Furthermore, as regards the Claimant’s request pertaining to moral damages, the Chamber agreed that such claim is to be rejected due to a lack of legal basis. 17. Finally, the DRC concluded its deliberations in the present matter by establishing that any further claim lodged by the Claimant is rejected. III. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber 1. The claim of the Claimant is partially accepted. 2. The Respondent has to pay to the Claimant, within 30 days as from the date of notification of this decision, the amount of EUR 1,971,661 plus 5% interest p.a. as from 11 March 2015 until the date of effective payment. 3. In the event that the aforementioned amount plus interest is not paid within the stated time limit, the present matter shall be submitted, upon request, to FIFA’s Disciplinary Committee for consideration and a formal decision. 4. Any further claim lodged by the Claimant is rejected. 5. 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 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: Marco Villiger Acting Deputy Secretary General Encl. CAS directives