F.I.F.A. – Camera di Risoluzione delle Controversie (2014-2015) – controversie di lavoro – ———- F.I.F.A. – Dispute Resolution Chamber (2014-2015) – labour disputes – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 19 February 2015, in the following composition: Thomas Grimm (Switzerland), Deputy Chairman Joaquim Evangelista (Portugal), member Theodore Giannikos (Greece), 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 Player I.

F.I.F.A. - Camera di Risoluzione delle Controversie (2014-2015) - controversie di lavoro – ---------- F.I.F.A. - Dispute Resolution Chamber (2014-2015) - labour disputes – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 19 February 2015, in the following composition: Thomas Grimm (Switzerland), Deputy Chairman Joaquim Evangelista (Portugal), member Theodore Giannikos (Greece), 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 Player I. Facts of the case 1. On 1 January 2014, the Player A from country B (hereinafter: player or Claimant) and the Club C from country D (hereinafter: club or Respondent) concluded an employment agreement, valid as from 1 January 2014 until 30 May 2014. 2. According to the employment contract, the player is entitled to receive a ‘match win bonus’ and a ‘match draw bonus’, according to the club’s bonus system. 3. The player is further entitled to receive inter alia an ‘country D league win’ bonus, a ‘Europe Qualify’ bonus and a ‘national cup win’ bonus, and he has the right to request the ‘club bonus system book’ before the start of the season. 4. The player states that he heard from other players of the club that they all had received a bonus of USD 20,000 for qualification for the European cup. 5. According to the player, he subsequently asked for a bonus payment of USD 20,000, but the club stated that the player did not have the right to claim this and paid him only USD 5,000 in cash. 6. Furthermore, the player states that he has asked for the club bonus system book, but the club did not fulfil its obligation to provide him with said document. 7. After having put the club in default on 7 October 2014, the player lodged a claim against the club in front of FIFA on 22 October 2014, maintaining that the club failed to pay the amount of USD 15,000 for the bonus for qualification for the European cup. 8. Therefore, the player asks that the club be ordered to pay the total amount of USD 15,000, plus 5% annual interest as from the due date of the payment, as well as to impose disciplinary sanctions on the club. 9. The club alleges that the player’s claim is groundless and not substantiated and that it has never paid such bonus amount of USD 20,000 to the players of the club. 10. Further, the club states that it provided all the players of the team with the club bonus system book on 1 August 2013. Also, the club states that it has the right make changes on the bonus awarding system and that it decided to pay the amount of USD 10,000 to the player, for winning the third place in the country D championship. The club also states that it has paid the player the full awards for all matches the club played during the season as well as medical costs, although the player was injured as from March 2014. 11. According to the club, on 13 June 2014 it has paid the above-mentioned components, as well as the salary of May 2014 and the visa fee to the player. Player 12. Therefore, the club holds that it has fulfilled all its obligations towards the player and asks that the player’s claim be rejected. 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 matter at hand. In this respect, it took note that the present matter was submitted to FIFA on 22 October 2014. Consequently, the Rules governing the procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber (edition 2014; hereinafter: Procedural Rules) are applicable to the matter at hand (cf. art. 21 par. 1 and par. 2 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 and par. 2 in combination with art. 22 lit. b) of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2014) 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 from country B and a club from 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 2014), and considering that the present claim was lodged on 22 October 2014, the 2014 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. In this respect, the Chamber started by acknowledging all the above-mentioned facts as well as the arguments and the documentation submitted by the parties. 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 noticed that acknowledged that the parties had signed an employment contract on 1 January 2014, in accordance with which the Claimant was entitled to receive, inter alia, a ‘Europe Qualify bonus’ in connection with qualification for the European cup. 6. In addition, the members of the Chamber observed that according to the employment contract the player had the right to request the ‘club bonus system Player book’ and that the club, in reply to the Claimant’s allegation that the Respondent did not provide him with said book after his alleged pertinent request, stated that it provided all the players of the team with said document on 1 August 2013. 7. In continuation, the Chamber noted that according to the Claimant the club had failed to pay the amount of USD 20,000 for qualification for the European cup, specifying that he only received the amount of USD 5,000 in cash, although all other players, according to the Claimant, were paid the amount of USD 20,000. Consequently, the Claimant asks to be awarded payment of the total amount of USD 15,000, plus interest. 8. Equally, the Chamber took note of the reply of the Respondent, which denied that it paid the amount of USD 20,000 as a bonus to the other players of the team. According to the Respondent, the Claimant’s claim is groundless and not substantiated and shall therefore be rejected. 9. In this respect, the members of the Chamber recalled the basic principle of burden of proof, as stipulated in art. 12 par. 3 of the Procedural Rules, according to which a party claiming a right on the basis of an alleged fact shall carry the respective burden of proof. 10. Having said this, the Chamber noted that the Claimant has not presented any evidence with respect to the alleged payment of USD 20,000 as a bonus for qualification for the European cup to other players of the team. Further, the Claimant has not submitted any evidence that could lead to the conclusion that he was entitled to such bonus payment of USD 20,000. 11. In view of the above, the Chamber concluded that the Claimant has not provided evidence in support of his claim. Consequently, the Chamber decided to reject the claim of the Claimant. III. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber The claim of the Claimant, Player A, is rejected. Player ***** 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