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 2 July 2015, in the following composition: Geoff Thompson (England), Chairman Theodore Giannikos (Greece), member Joaquim Evangelista (Portugal), 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 between the parties I.

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 2 July 2015, in the following composition: Geoff Thompson (England), Chairman Theodore Giannikos (Greece), member Joaquim Evangelista (Portugal), 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 between the parties I. Facts of the case 1. On 15 August 2013, the player from country B, Player A (hereinafter: the player or Claimant), and the club from country D, Club C (hereinafter: the club or Respondent), concluded an employment contract (hereinafter: the contract) valid as from 15 August 2013 until 30 June 2014. 2. In accordance with the contract, the player was inter alia entitled to receive total remuneration of USD 800,000 for the period running from 15 August 2013 until 30 June 2014. 3. The contract further provides that “The club has the option to break this contract by 31/12/2013, without any compensation to the second party”. 4. In addition, the contract stipulates that the player’s remuneration is payable in the following manner: a. USD 100,000 upon signature of the contract; b. USD 300,000 divided into 4 monthly salaries of USD 75,000 payable “at the end of each month”; c. Furthermore, “in case of the club desire to complete the contract till 30/6/2014” the player is owed USD 100,000 on 15 January 2014 and USD 300,000 “divided as monthly salary for the period of the contract”. 5. On 10 January 2014, the player formally put the club in default of USD 300,000 corresponding to his salaries of September to December 2013 (i.e. 4 x USD 75,000). 6. On 7 February 2014, the player lodged a claim before FIFA against the club asking that he be paid outstanding remuneration only, relating to the four monthly contractually prescribed payments of USD 75,000, for a total of USD 300,000. The player claims 5% interest as of the relevant due dates, “namely from September 2013”. 7. The player claims that although he was paid his signing bonus, he has not received the payments which fell due at the end of September, October, November and December 2013. He understands that his contract was not extended until 30 June 2014 and does not claim any other amount due after 31 December 2013. 8. In spite of having been granted multiple deadline extensions by FIFA in order to reply, the club failed to respond to the claim or make any statement during the course of the investigation. II. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber 1. First, the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter also referred to as the 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 7 February 2014. Consequently, the Rules governing the procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber (edition 2012; hereinafter: the Procedural Rules) are applicable to the matter at hand (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 (2015 edition) 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 (2015 edition), and considering that the present claim was lodged on 7 February 2014, the 2012 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 aforementioned facts as well as the arguments and the documentation submitted by the parties. The Chamber, however, 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. The members of the Chamber acknowledged that the parties to the dispute had signed a valid employment contract on 15 August 2013, in accordance with which the Respondent would pay the Claimant total Remuneration of USD 400,000 between 15 August 2013 and 31 December 2013. 6. 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 members of the Chamber were of the opinion that the Respondent renounced its right of defence and had thus accepted the allegations of the Claimant. 7. Furthermore, 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 on the basis of the documentation already on file; i.e. upon the statements and documents presented by the Claimant. 8. In continuation, the Chamber acknowledged that in accordance with the employment contract provided by the Claimant, the Respondent had the obligation to pay to the Claimant the total amount of USD 400,000 for the first part of the contract, i.e. until 31 December 2013. 9. In this respect, the DRC took into consideration that according to the Claimant, the Respondent paid the amount of USD 100,000 in accordance with the contract (cf. point I.2.a. above) but had failed to pay his remuneration in the total amount of USD 300,000 corresponding to unpaid salaries of September until December 2013. Consequently, the Claimant requested to be awarded the payment of the total amount of USD 300,000 plus 5% interest p.a. as from the relevant due dates. 10. Taking into account the documentation presented by the Claimant in support of his position, the members of the Chamber concluded that the Claimant had substantiated his claim pertaining to outstanding remuneration with sufficient documentary evidence. 11. On account of the aforementioned considerations, the members of the Chamber established that the Respondent had failed to remit the Claimant’s monthly remuneration in the total amount of USD 300,000 corresponding to the salaries of September to December 2013. 12. 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 USD 300,000. 13. In addition, taking the Claimant’s request into account as well as the constant practice of the Dispute Resolution Chamber, the members of the Chamber decided that the Respondent must pay to the Claimant interest of 5% p.a. on the total amount of USD 300,000 as from the day following the due date of each monthly payment (cf. point III.2. below). 14. 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, 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, outstanding remuneration in the amount of USD 300,000 plus 5% interest p.a. until the date of effective payment as follows: a. 5% p.a. as of 1 October 2013 on the amount of USD 75,000; b. 5% p.a. as of 1 November 2013 on the amount of USD 75,000; c. 5% p.a. as of 1 December 2013 on the amount of USD 75,000; d. 5% p.a. as of 1 January 2014 on the amount of USD 75,000. 3. In the event that the aforementioned sum 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 other 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: Markus Kattner Acting Secretary General Encl. CAS directives