F.I.F.A. – Players’ Status Committee / Commissione per lo Status dei Calciatori – club vs club disputes / controversie tra società – (2020-2021) – fifa.com – atto non ufficiale – Decision 8 December 2020

Decision of the

Single Judge of the Players' Status Committee

passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 8 December 2020,

regarding a contractual dispute concerning the player Elvis Saric

BY:

José Luis Andrade (Portugal), Single Judge of the PSC

CLAIMANT:

Suwon Samsung Bluewings FC, Korea Republic

RESPONDENT:

Club Al Ahli, Saudi Arabia

I. FACTS OF THE CASE

1. On 7 July 2019, the Claimant and the Respondent concluded a transfer agreement (hereinafter: “the agreement”) in connection with the definitive transfer of the player for an amount of USD 1,700,000 payable in two instalments:

1) USD 1,200,000 on 25 July 2019 and

2) USD 500,000 on 25 February 2020.

2. The agreement provided: “Delay with payments: In case AL AHLI delays for more than 15 days to make any of the payments according to this transfer agreement, and under the condition that SUWON SAMSUNG BLUEWINGS FC has fulfilled its obligations for sending the duly issued invoice to AL AHLI, then AL AHLI shall be obliged to pay to SUWON SAMSUNG BLUEWINGS FC an annual interest of 5% p.a. on the due amount remained unpaid. For this clause to be effectuated, SUWON SAMSUNG BLUEWINGS FC shall send, after 15 days of delay, an official notice of payment to AL AHLI by email. If AL AHLI does not pay the due amount to SUWON SAMSUNG BLUEWINGS FC, on the next working day after receiving the notice of payment, then AL AHLI shall be obliged to pay the due amount along with above annual interest of 5% p.a. to be calculated from the next working day after received the notice of payment”.

3. On 11 and 16 March 2020, the Claimant sent default notices to the Respondent requesting the payment of the second instalment (i.e. USD 500,000) “soonest possible”.

4. The Claimant sent nine further communications to the Respondent on 19 March, 23 March, 25 March, 3 April, 10 April, 27 April, 19 May, 24 June, 10 July, 4 August and 19 August, all 2020 reminding the Respondent that the second instalment remained outstanding and calculating the due interest.

5. The Respondent replied only one time, on 24 March 2020, stating that “while it acknowledges the second payment is overdue and it is committed to make the payment, it will arbitrarily postpone the payment until after the current health crisis stops”.

6. On 24 August 2020, the Claimant lodged the present claim requesting the Respondent to pay the second instalment of the transfer fee amounting to USD 500,000 plus interest at 5% per year from 17 March 2020 (i.e. day after the second default notice) until the date of effective payment.

7. The Claimant argued that the Respondent simply ignored all its requests except for the sole answer dated 24 March 2020 by means of which the latter arbitrarily postponed the payment until the health crisis stops. The Claimant further stated that the health crisis cannot be used by the Respondent´s as an excuse to avoid fulfilling its contractual obligations.

8. The Respondent presented its position and argued that “Since March 2020 the COVID-19 outbreak has disrupted everyday activities … This has naturally led to several Financial issues… Al-Ahli FC … was affected by this pandemic and as a result of this force majeure, we have an important lack of financial liquidity at the present time due to the absence of financial returns such as sponsorship, ticket revenue,, etc.”.

9. The Respondent stated that based on the aforementioned reasons, it was trying to settle the present matter amicably and consequently it requested, “to grant us reasonable time before deciding on the matter”.

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”) analyzed which Procedural Rules were applicable to the matter at hand. In this respect, he referred to the wording of art. 21 of the 2020 edition of the Rules Governing the Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: “the Procedural Rules”) as well as to the fact that the present matter was submitted to FIFA on 24 August 2020 and decided on 8 December 2020. Therefore, the Single Judge concluded that the June 2020 edition of the Procedural Rules is applicable to the matter at hand.

2. Subsequently, the Single Judge analyzed which edition of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players is applicable as to the substance of the matter. In this respect, he referred, on the one hand, to art. 26 par. 1 and 2 of the October 2020 edition of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players and, on the other hand, to the fact that the claim was lodged in front of FIFA on 24 August 2020. In view of the foregoing, the Single Judge concluded that the August 2020 edition of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (hereinafter: “the Regulations”) is applicable to the case at hand as to the substance.

3. Furthermore, the Single Judge confirmed that, on the basis of art. 3 par. 1 and par. 2 of the Procedural Rules in connection with art. 23 par. 1 and par. 4 as well as art. 22 lit. f) of the Regulations, he was competent to deal with the present matter since it concerned a dispute between two clubs affiliated to two different associations.

4. The competence of the Single Judge and the applicable regulations having been established, and entering into the substance of the matter, the Single Judge started by acknowledging the above-mentioned facts as well as the arguments and the documentation submitted by the parties. The Single Judge emphasized, however, that in the following considerations he will refer only to the facts, arguments and documentary evidence, which he considered pertinent for the assessment of the matter at hand.

5. In continuation, the Single Judge acknowledged that the parties concluded the agreement related to the transfer of the player from the Claimant to the Respondent and that according to said agreement the Respondent undertook to pay to the Claimant a transfer fee amounting to USD 1,700,000 in two instalments, i.e. USD 1,200,000 on 25 July 2019 and USD 500,000 on 25 February 2020 respectively.

6. The Single Judge recalled that on 24 August 2020, the Claimant lodged the present claim against the Respondent in front of FIFA, maintaining that the Respondent has overdue payables towards it in the total amount of USD 500,000 corresponding to the second instalment, which fell due on 25 February 2020.

7. The Single Judge further observed that the Claimant asked to be awarded 5% interest p.a. as of 17 March 2020 until the date of effective payment.

8. In this context, the Single Judge took note of the fact that the Claimant sent several default notices to the Respondent requesting the outstanding payment and that the latter only replied to one of them.

9. Subsequently, the Single Judge observed that the Respondent, for its part, argued not being in a position to pay to the Claimant due to financial hardship, as a consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic.

10. In this regard, the Single Judge wished to stress that, in line with the well-established jurisprudence of the Players´ Status Committee, financial difficulties of clubs cannot be considered a valid justification for non-compliance by a club with its essential contractual obligations that is to pay in a timely manner.

11. In particular, with regard to the alleged effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Single Judge highlighted that the agreement was concluded on 7 July 2019 and that the second instalment was due on 25 February 2020, in other words, before the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic started.

12. What is more, the Single Judge underlined that the Respondent failed to present any evidence to support its allegations.

13. In view of all the above, the Single Judge concluded that the Respondent´s allegations should be rejected.

14. Taking into account the documentation presented by the Claimant in support of its petition, the Single Judge concluded that the Claimant had substantiated its claim pertaining to the outstanding transfer fee with sufficient documentary evidence.

15. On account of the aforementioned considerations, the Single Judge established that the Respondent failed to remit USD 500,000 to the Claimant.

16. Consequently, the Single Judge decided that, in accordance with the general legal principle of pacta sunt servanda, the Respondent is liable to pay to the Claimant the amount of USD 500,000 as established in the agreement.

17. Furthermore, taking into consideration the Claimant’s claim, the Single Judge decided to award interest at the rate of 5% p.a. on the relevant instalment as of 17 March 2020, i.e. day after the second default notice.

18. Moreover, taking into account the consideration under number II./2. above, the Single Judge referred to par. 1 and 2 of art. 24bis of the Regulations, which stipulate that, with its decision, the pertinent FIFA deciding body shall also rule on the consequences deriving from the failure of the concerned party to pay the relevant amounts of outstanding remuneration and/or compensation in due time.

19. In this regard, the Single Judge pointed out that, against clubs, the consequence of the failure to pay the relevant amounts in due time shall consist of a ban from registering any new players, either nationally or internationally, up until the due amounts are paid and for the maximum duration of three entire and consecutive registration periods.

20. Therefore, bearing in mind the above, the Single Judge decided that, in the event that the Respondent does not pay the amounts due to the Claimant within 45 days as from the moment in which the Claimant, following the notification of the present decision, communicates the relevant bank details to the Respondent, a ban from registering any new players, either nationally or internationally, for the maximum duration of three entire and consecutive registration periods shall become effective on the Respondent in accordance with art. 24bis par. 2 and 4 of the Regulations.

21. Finally, the Single Judge recalled that the above-mentioned ban will be lifted immediately and prior to its complete serving upon payment of the due amounts, in accordance with art. 24bis par. 3 of the Regulations.

III. DECISION OF SINGLE JUDGE OF THE PLAYERS' STATUS COMMITTEE

1. The claim of the Claimant, Suwon Samsung Bluewings FC, is accepted.

2. The Respondent, Al Ahli, has to pay to the Claimant the amount of USD 500,000 plus a 5% annual interest from 17 March 2020 until the date of effective payment.

3. The Claimant is directed to immediately and directly inform the Respondent of the relevant bank account to which the Respondent must pay the due amount.

4. The Respondent shall provide evidence of payment of the due amount in accordance with this decision to psdfifa@fifa.org, duly translated, if applicable, into one of the official FIFA languages (English, French, German, Spanish).

5. In the event that the amount due, plus interest as established above is not paid by the Respondent within 45 days, as from the notification by the Claimant of the relevant bank details to the Respondent, the following consequences shall arise:

 1.

The Respondent shall be banned from registering any new players, either nationally or internationally, up until the due amount is paid and for the maximum duration of three entire and consecutive registration periods. The aforementioned ban mentioned will be lifted immediately and prior to its complete serving, once the due amount is paid.

(cf. art. 24bis of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players). 2.

In the event that the payable amount as per in this decision is still not paid by the end of the ban of three entire and consecutive registration periods, the present matter shall be submitted, upon request, to the FIFA Disciplinary Committee.

6. The decision is rendered free of costs.

For the Players' Status Committee:

Emilio García Silvero

Chief Legal & Compliance Officer

NOTE RELATED TO THE APPEAL PROCEDURE:

According to article 58 par. 1 of the FIFA Statutes, this decision may be appealed against before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) within 21 days of receipt of the notification of this decision.

NOTE RELATED TO THE PUBLICATION:

FIFA may publish this decision. For reasons of confidentiality, FIFA may decide, at the request of a party within five days of the notification of the motivated decision, to publish an anonymised or a redacted version (cf. article 20 of the Procedural Rules).

CONTACT INFORMATION:

Fédération Internationale de Football Association

FIFA-Strasse 20 P.O. Box 8044 Zurich Switzerland

www.fifa.com | legal.fifa.com | psdfifa@fifa.org | T: +41 (0)43 222 7777