F.I.F.A. – Players’ Status Committee / Commissione per lo Status dei Calciatori – coach disputes / controversie allenatori (2017-2018) – fifa.com – atto non ufficiale – Decision of the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee passed in Zurich, Switzerland, 29 August 2017

Decision of the Single Judge

of the Players’ Status Committee

passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 29 August 2017,

by

Mr Geoff Thompson (England),

Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee,

on the claim presented by the coach

Coach A, Country B

as “Claimant”

against the club

Club C, Country D

as “Respondent”

regarding an employment-related contractual dispute

arisen between the parties

I. Facts of the case

1. On 16 August 2012, the Coach of Country B, Coach A (hereinafter: the Claimant) and the Club of Country D, Club C (hereinafter: the Respondent) concluded an employment contract (hereinafter: the contract), valid for “one season, that is beginning from initiation of year 91-92 (2012-2013) date of 2012-2013)”, according to which the Claimant was hired by the Respondent as “Head Coach”.

2. In accordance with article 3 of the contract, the Claimant was entitled to receive from the Respondent the amount of 270,000,000 “by the beginning of the season and the remainder through the initiation of month of September”.

3. On 2 August 2014, the Claimant and the Respondent concluded a settlement agreement (hereinafter: the settlement agreement) by means of which the parties agreed that the Claimant would receive from the Respondent “188,000,000 (one hundred eighty eight), 70,000,000 (seventy million) of this amount will be paid to August 23, 2014 and the remaining amount is 80,000,000 (eighty million), which will be paid to October 23, 2014 and full clearance will be made accordingly”.

4. Furthermore, the settlement agreement stated inter alia that, “in case of negligence in paying the claims in mentioned maturity dates, this memo of understanding will be annulled and [the Claimant] will be entitled to file claims in Fifa until receiving all his claims”.

5. On 19 February 2016, the Claimant lodged a claim in front of FIFA against the Respondent, alleging that the latter had breached the settlement agreement.

6. In this respect, the Claimant alleged that the Respondent had partially failed to pay his outstanding remuneration in accordance with the settlement agreement.

7. Consequently, in accordance with his claim, the Claimant requested from the Respondent “the amount of three hundred and thirty eight thousand, which is equivalent of the amount of USD 62,666”, as outstanding remuneration, plus interest at a rate of 5% p.a. on the said amount from 24 October 2014 until the date of effective payment as well as proceeding costs to be borne by the latter.

8. In spite of having been invited to do so by FIFA, the Respondent did not reply to the claim lodged against it.

9. On 5 July 2017, i.e. after the closure of the investigation phase, the Respondent provided FIFA with unsolicited documentation alleging that the parties were trying to settle amicably the present dispute.

10. On 21 July 2017, the Claimant submitted to FIFA his comments and contested all the allegations of the Respondent.

II. Considerations of the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee

1. First of all, the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee (hereinafter: the Single Judge) analysed which edition of the Rules Governing the Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: Procedural Rules) was applicable to the matter at hand. In this respect, considering that the present matter was submitted to FIFA on 19 February 2016, the Single Judge concluded that the 2015 edition of the Procedural Rules is applicable in the matter at hand (cf. art. 21 of the 2015 and 2017 editions of the Procedural Rules).

2. Subsequently, the Single Judge analysed which edition of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (hereinafter: “the Regulations”) should be applicable as to the substance of the matter. In this respect, he confirmed that the present matter was submitted to FIFA on 19 February 2016 and, therefore, concluded that the 2015 edition of the Regulations is applicable in the matter at hand as to the substance (cf. art. 26 par. 1 and par. 2 of the 2015 and 2016 editions of the Regulations).

3. With regard to his competence, the Single Judge confirmed that on the basis of art. 3 par. 1 and 2 of the Procedural Rules in connection with art. 23 par. 1 and 4 as well as art. 22 lit. c) of the 2016 edition of the Regulations, he was competent to deal with the present matter since it concerned an employment-related dispute between a coach and a club of an international dimension.

4. His competence and the applicable regulations having been established and entering into the substance of the matter, the Single Judge started his analysis by acknowledging the facts of the case and the arguments of the parties as well as the documents contained in the file. However, the Single Judge emphasised that in the following considerations he will refer only to the facts, arguments and documentary evidence that he considered pertinent for the assessment of the matter at hand.

5. In doing so and to begin with, the Single Judge acknowledged that, on 2 August 2014, the Respondent and the Claimant concluded the settlement agreement by means of which they agreed that the latter would receive from the Respondent the amount of “188,000,000 (one hundred eighty eight), 70,000,000 (seventy million) of this amount will be paid to August 23, 2014 and the remaining amount is 80,000,000 (eighty million), which will be paid to October 23, 2014 and full clearance will be made accordingly”.

6. Furthermore, the Single Judge remarked that the settlement agreement stated inter alia that, “in case of negligence in paying the claims in mentioned maturity dates, this memo of understanding will be annulled and [the Claimant] will be entitled to file claims in Fifa until receiving all his claims”.

7. In continuation, the Single Judge took note that the Claimant maintained being entitled to receive from the Respondent outstanding remuneration, alleging that the Respondent failed to fulfil his contractually stipulated financial obligations towards him, and that, therefore, the latter had breached the settlement agreement. In view of the above, the Claimant requested from the Respondent, as stated in his claim, “the amount of three hundred and thirty eight thousand which is equivalent of the amount of USD 62,666”, as outstanding remuneration, plus interest at a rate of 5% p.a. on the said amount from 24 October 2014 until the date of effective payment as well as proceeding costs to be borne by the latter.

8. Equally, the Single Judge remarked that the Respondent, for its part, had never submitted its position to the claim lodged against it by the Claimant, in spite of having been invited to do so. In this way, the Single Judge recalled that the Respondent renounced to its right of defence and, thus, accepted the allegations of the Claimant in full.

9. Furthermore, as a consequence of the aforementioned considerations, the Single Judge concurred that in accordance with art. 9 par. 3 of the Procedural Rules he shall take a decision upon the basis of the documents already on file, in other words, upon the documents and allegations presented by the Claimant.

10. Turning his attention to the claim, the Single Judge emphasised that, in accordance with the settlement agreement, it remained undisputed that the Claimant is contractually entitled to receive from the Respondent outstanding remuneration.

11. Bearing in mind the aforementioned and the basic legal principle of pacta sunt servanda, which in essence means that agreements must be respected by the parties in good faith, the Single Judge held that the Respondent must pay the Claimant outstanding remuneration according to the settlement agreement.

12. With regard to the amount claimed by the Claimant as outstanding remuneration, the Single Judge focussed on the wording of the Claimant’s request and wished to underline that the Claimant, as stated in his claim, requested from the Respondent “the amount of three hundred and thirty eight thousand”, allegedly equivalent to USD 62,666. In this regard, the Single Judge referred to the settlement agreement, which wording is slightly ambiguous, but which clearly stipulates the currency, i.e., in which the amounts were to be paid. As there is no reference to any amount in USD, the Single Judge held that he could only award amounts in.

13. Consequently, considering the Claimant’s request, the Single Judge concluded that the Respondent must pay to the Claimant the amount of 338,000 as outstanding remuneration.

14. In continuation and in view of the Claimant’s request for interest at a rate of 5% p.a. and in line with the well-established jurisprudence of the Players’ Status Committee, the Single Judge granted interest for late payment at a rate of 5% p.a. on the aforementioned amount, i.e. 338,000, as from 24 October 2014 until the date of effective payment.

15. In conclusion, the Single Judge decided that the claim of the Claimant is accepted and held that the Respondent has to pay to the Claimant the amount of 338,000 as outstanding remuneration, plus 5% interest p.a. on the said amount as from 24 October 2014 until the date of effective payment.

16. Lastly, the Single Judge referred to art. 25 par. 2 of the Regulations in combination with art. 18 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules, according to which in the proceedings before the Players’ Status Committee and the Single Judge, costs in the maximum amount of CHF 25,000 are levied. The costs are to be borne in consideration of the parties’ degree of success in the proceedings and are normally to be paid by the unsuccessful party.

17. In respect of the above, and taking into account that the Claimant’s claim is accepted, the Single Judge concluded that the Respondent has to bear the costs of the current proceedings before FIFA.

18. Furthermore and according to Annexe A of the Procedural Rules, the costs of the proceedings are to be levied on the basis of the amount in dispute. On that basis, the Single Judge held that the amount to be taken into consideration in the present proceedings is over CHF 50,000. Consequently, the Single Judge concluded that the maximum amount of costs of the proceedings corresponds to CHF 10,000.

19. In conclusion, and considering the particularities of the present matter, the Single Judge determined the costs of the current proceedings to the amount of CHF 10,000. Furthermore, and in line with his aforementioned considerations and taking into account the degree of success of the claim as well as that the Respondent did not reply to the claim, the Single Judge decided that the amount of CHF 10,000 has to be paid by the Respondent.

III. Decision of the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee

1. The claim of the Claimant, Coach A, is accepted.

2. The Respondent, Club C, has to pay to the Claimant, Coach A, within 30 days as from the date of notification of this decision, the total amount of 338,000 as outstanding remuneration as well as 5% interest p.a. on the said amount as from 24 October 2014 until the date of effective payment.

3. If 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. The final costs of the proceedings in the amount of CHF 10,000 are to be paid by the Respondent, Club C, within 30 days as from the date of notification of this decision, as follows:

4.1 The amount of CHF 8,000 has to be paid to FIFA to the following bank account with reference to case nr. XXX:

UBS Zurich

Account number 366.677.01U (FIFA Players’ Status)

Clearing number 230

IBAN: CH27 0023 0230 3666 7701U

SWIFT: UBSWCHZH80A

4.2 The amount of CHF 2,000 has to be paid directly to the Claimant, Coach A.

5. The Claimant, Coach A, is directed to inform the Respondent, Club C, immediately and directly of the account number to which the remittances under points 2 and 4.2 above are to be made and to notify the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee of every payment received.

*****

Note relating to the motivated decision (legal remedy):

According to article 58 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

For the Single Judge of the

Players’ Status Committee

Omar Ongaro

Football Regulatory Director

Encl. CAS directives