F.I.F.A. – Dispute Resolution Chamber / Camera di Risoluzione delle Controversie – labour disputes / controversie di lavoro (2019-2020) – fifa.com – atto non ufficiale – Decision 12 June 2020

Decision of the

Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) judge

passed via videoconference, on 12 June 2020,

regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the player Amro Abdililah Jeniat

BY:

Daan de Jong (Netherlands), DRC Judge

CLAIMANT:

Amro Abdililah Jeniat, Syria

RESPONDENT:

Al Shabab Club, Oman

I. FACTS OF THE CASE

1. On an unspecified date, the Syrian player, Amro Abdililah Jeniat (hereinafter: Claimant) and the Omani club, Al Shabab (hereinafter: Respondent) signed an employment contract valid as from 1 August 2018 until 31 May 2019.

2. Under “Schedule 1” of the contract, the Claimant was entitled to remuneration, as follows:

a) USD 5,000“When the contract is signed”;

b) USD 25,000 “end of the first round”;

c) USD 25,000 “end of the second round”;

d) “Total salary of Dollar divided to [USD 2,000] monthly”.

3. On 22 March 2020, the Claimant put the Respondent in default requesting the amount of USD 75,000 to be paid within 10 days. In said letter, the Claimant held the following:

“The two parties also agreed that the [Respondent] has to pay USD 5,000 upon signing the contract, USD 25,000 after the end of the first round, and USD 25,000 after the end of the second round, and the [Respondent] is obliged to pay a monthly salary of USD 2,000 during the contract period”.

4. On 8 April 2020, the Claimant lodged a claim against the Respondent for overdue payables, requesting the amount of USD 75,000 plus 5% interest p.a. as from “the due dates of each payment”.

5. In addition, the Claimant requested the imposition of sporting sanctions on the Respondent.

6. In his claim, the Claimant referred to his default letter dated 22 March 2020, and stated that “the club did not respond to the player’s notification nor did [it] pay the required amounts”.

7. In this context, the amount of USD 75,000 represented the entire value of the employment contract which, as per the Claimant, is still outstanding.

8. The Claimant further reiterated in his claim that “the two parties also agreed that the [Respondent] has to pay USD 5,000 upon signing the contract, USD 25,000 after the end of the first round, and USD 25,000 after the end of the second round, and the [Respondent] is obliged to pay a monthly salary of USD 2,000 during the contract period”.

9. Despite being requested to provide its comments on the claim of the Claimant, the Respondent failed to do so.

II. CONSIDERATIONS OF THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION CHAMBER (DRC) judge

10. First of all, the DRC Judge analysed whether he was competent to deal with the case at hand. In this respect, he took note that the present matter was submitted to FIFA on 8 April 2020. Taking into account 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), the aforementioned edition of the Procedural Rules is applicable to the matter at hand

11. Subsequently, DRC Judge 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 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 Syrian player and an Omani club.

12. In continuation, the DRC Judge analysed which regulations should be applicable as to the substance of the matter. In this respect, he confirmed that in accordance with art. 26 par. 1 and 2 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2020) and considering that the present claim was lodged on 8 April 2020, the March 2020 edition of the said regulations (hereinafter: Regulations) is applicable to the matter at hand as to the substance.

13. The competence of the DRC Judge and the applicable regulations having been established, the DRC Judge entered into the substance of the matter. In this respect, the DRC Judge started by acknowledging all the above-mentioned facts and arguments as well as the documentation on file. However, the DRC Judge emphasised 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.

14. In this respect, the DRC Judge firstly recalled that the Claimant and the Respondent signed an employment contract which was valid as from 1 August 2018 until 31 May 2019.

15. In continuation, the DRC Judge understood that, in accordance with the employment contract, the Respondent was obliged to pay to the Claimant, a total remuneration amount of USD 75,000 for the duration of the contract, as follows:

a) USD 5,000 as sign on fee;

b) USD 25,000 “end of the first round”;

c) USD 25,000 “end of the second round”;

d) 10 monthly salaries of USD 2,000 each.

16. In continuation, the DRC Judge recalled that the Claimant lodged a claim against the Respondent, maintaining that the Respondent has overdue payables towards him in the total amount of USD 75,000, corresponding to the entire value of the employment contract.

17. Subsequently, the DRC Judge 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 Judge was of the opinion that the Respondent renounced its right of defence and, thus, accepted the allegations of the Claimant.

18. Furthermore, as a consequence of the aforementioned consideration, the DRC Judge decided 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 statements and documents presented by the Claimant.

19. In this context, the DRC Judge took particular note of the fact on 22 March 2020, the Claimant put the Respondent in default, requesting that the Respondent pay him the amount of USD 75,000 within 10 days.

20. Taking into account the documentation presented by the Claimant in support of his petition, the DRC Judge concluded that the Claimant had substantiated his claim pertaining to overdue payables with sufficient documentary evidence in accordance with art. 12 par. 3 of the Procedural Rules. That is, the DRC Judge concluded that the Claimant presented sufficient documentation relating to his claim for the outstanding salaries provided by the contract.

21. On account of the aforementioned considerations, the DRC Judge established that the Respondent failed to remit the Claimant’s remuneration in the total amount of USD 75,000.

22. In addition, the DRC Judge established that the Respondent had delayed a due payment for more than thirty days without a prima facie contractual basis.

23. Consequently, the DRC Judge decided that, in accordance with the general legal principle of pacta sunt servanda, the Respondent is liable to pay to the Claimant overdue payables in the total amount of USD 75,000 corresponding to the entire value of the employment contract.

24. In addition, taking into account the Claimant’s request as well as the constant practice of the Dispute Resolution Chamber, the DRC judge decided that the Respondent must pay to the Claimant interest of 5% p.a. as from the respective due dates.

25. Having said this, and given that no due dates were provided for in the contract, the DRC Judge decided that the interest on the two instalments of USD 25,000 payable “at the end of the first round” and “at the end of the second round” respectively, would apply as from the day following the expiry date of the contract, i.e. 1 June 2019.

26. Consequently, the DRC judge decided that the Respondent must pay to the Claimant interest of 5% p.a. as follows:

- 5% interest p.a. as from 2 August 2018 on the amount of USD 5,000;

- 5% interest p.a. as from 1 September 2018 on the amount of USD 2,000;

- 5% interest p.a. as from 1 October 2018 on the amount of USD 2,000;

- 5% interest p.a. as from 1 November 2018 on the amount of USD 2,000;

- 5% interest p.a. as from 1 December 2018 on the amount of USD 2,000;

- 5% interest p.a. as from 1 January 2019 on the amount of USD 2,000;

- 5% interest p.a. as from 1 February 2019 on the amount of USD 2, 000

- 5% interest p.a. as from 1 March 2019 on the amount of USD 2,000;

- 5% interest p.a. as from 1 April 2019 on the amount of USD 2,000

- 5% interest p.a. as from 1 May 2019 on the amount of USD 2,000;

- 5% interest p.a. as from 1 June 2019 on the amount of USD 52,000.

27. Furthermore, taking into account the consideration under point 12 above, the DRC Judge referred to art.12bis par. 2 of the Regulations, which stipulates that any club found to have delayed a due payment for more than thirty days without a prima facie contractual basis may be sanctioned in accordance with art. 12bis par. 4 of the Regulations.

28. The DRC judge established that by virtue of art. 12bis par. 4 of the Regulations he has competence to impose sanctions on the Respondent. The DRC judge further wished to highlight that a repeated offence will be considered as an aggravating circumstance and lead to a more severe penalty in accordance with art. 12bis par. 6 of the Regulations.

29. In this context, the DRC Judge highlighted that, on 5 October 2018 and 3 February 2020, the Respondent had already been found to have delayed a due payment for more than 30 days without a prima facie contractual basis. In view of the above, the DRC Judge decided to impose a fine on the Respondent in accordance with art. 12bis par. 4 lit. c) of the Regulations. Furthermore, taking into consideration the amount due, the DRC judge regarded a fine amounting to CHF 7,500 as appropriate and hence decided to impose said fine on the Respondent

30. Finally, taking into account the consideration under point 12 above, the DRC judge referred to par. 1 and 2 of art. 24bis of the Regulations, which stipulate that, with his 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.

31. In this regard, the DRC 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.

32. Therefore, bearing in mind the above, the DRC 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.

33. Finally, the DRC 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 THE DRC judge

1. The claim of the Claimant, Amro Abdililah Jeniat, is accepted.

2. The Respondent, Al Shabab Club, has to pay to the Claimant, the following amount of USD 75,000 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. until the date of effective payment as follows:

- 5% interest p.a. as from 2 August 2018 on the amount of USD 5,000;

- 5% interest p.a. as from 1 September 2018 on the amount of USD 2,000;

- 5% interest p.a. as from 1 October 2018 on the amount of USD 2,000;

- 5% interest p.a. as from 1 November 2018 on the amount of USD 2,000;

- 5% interest p.a. as from 1 December 2018 on the amount of USD 2,000;

- 5% interest p.a. as from 1 January 2019 on the amount of USD 2,000;

- 5% interest p.a. as from 1 February 2019 on the amount of USD 2,000;

- 5% interest p.a. as from 1 March 2019 on the amount of USD 2,000;

- 5% interest p.a. as from 1 April 2019 on the amount of USD 2,000

- 5% interest p.a. as from 1 May 2019 on the amount of USD 2,000;

- 5% interest p.a. as from 1 June 2019 on the amount of USD 52,000.

3. The Respondent is ordered to pay a fine in the amount of CHF 7,500. The fine is to be paid within 45 days of notification of the present decision to FIFA to the following bank account with reference to case number 20-00594/osv:

Account number 366.677.01U (FIFA Players’ Status) UBS Zurich,

SWIFT: UBSWCHZH80A,

Clearing number 230,

IBAN: CH 27 0023 0230 3666,

4. 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.

5. 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).

6. 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.

For the DRC judge :

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