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 5 May 2020

Decision of the

Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) judge

passed on 5 May 2020,

by Pavel Pivovarov (Russia), DRC judge

on the claim presented by the player,

Jeronimo Jorge Barrales, Argentina

represented by Mr Santiago San Torcuato

as Claimant

against the club,

PAS LAMIA 1964 FC, Greece

as Respondent

regarding an employment-related dispute

between the parties

I. Facts of the case

1. On 7 August 2018, the Argentinian player, Jeronimo Jorge Barrales (hereinafter: the Claimant or the player) and the Greek club, PAS LAMIA 1964 FC (hereinafter: the Respondent or the club) concluded an employment contract (hereinafter: the contract), valid as from the date of signature until 30 June 2019.

2. According to clause 4.1. of the contract, the club committed itself to pay to the player a monthly salary of EUR 720, payable at the end of each month. Furthermore, the player was also entitled to receive an extraordinary remuneration, as follows:

a) A Christmas bonus of EUR 720;

b) An Easter bonus of EUR 360;

c) A holiday bonus of EUR 360.

3. Additionally, clause 4.2. of the contract also stipulated that should the Claimant scored or assisted 10 goals in official matches, he would be entitled to receive a bonus of EUR 10,000 (hereinafter: the performance bonus).

4. On 17 November 2019, the player put the club in default of payment of EUR 12,160, corresponding to the performance bonus as well as three monthly salaries for April, May and June 2019. The player granted the club a 13 days’ deadline to remedy the default, i.e. until 30 November 2019.

5. As per the Claimant, on an unspecified date, the Respondent paid to the Claimant the amount of EUR 302.48.

6. Subsequently, on 23 December 2019, the player lodged a claim against the club, requesting the total amount of EUR 11,857.52, plus 5% interest p.a. as from the due dates, broken down as follows:

- EUR 417,52, corresponding to the remainder of the monthly salary for April 2019;

- EUR 720, corresponding to the monthly salary for May 2019;

- EUR 720, corresponding to the monthly salary for June 2019;

- EUR 10,000, corresponding to the performance bonus stipulated under clause 4.2. of the contract.

7. In his claim, the player explained that the club failed to comply with its financial obligations by not paying the performance bonus along with 3 monthly salaries.

8. Furthermore, with regard to the performance bonus claimed, the Claimant presented evidence that he scored 9 goals and assisted 1 goal during the 2018/2019 season.

9. In its reply to the claim, the club maintained having settled its debt by paying to the Claimant the amount of EUR 8,000. In support of its statements, the Respondent provided an evidence of payment of EUR 8,000, dated 3 February 2020.

10. As regards the remaining amount, i.e. EUR 3,857.52, the Respondent sustained that “the amount claimed by the player […] relates to gross earnings (not net / bank receipts are attached), so with the deposit above the Club has fully settled the claim of the player”. In support of its statements, the Respondent provided three untranslated bank receipts amounting to EUR 1,585.78.

11. In continuation, on 25 February 2020, by means of an unsolicited correspondence, the Claimant acknowledged having received the amount of EUR 8,000 (cf. point I.9. above).

12. Notwithstanding the above, the Claimant sustained that the amount of EUR 3,857.52 remained outstanding to him.

II. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) judge

1. First of all, the Dispute Resolution Chamber judge (hereinafter: the DRC Judge) analysed whether he was competent to deal with the case at hand. In this respect, he referred to the wording of art. 21 of the 2019 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 23 December 2019 and decided on 5 May 2020. Therefore, the DRC Judge concluded that the 2019 edition of the Procedural Rules is applicable to the matter at hand.

2. Furthermore, 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, and considering that the present claim was lodged on 23 December 2019, the October 2019 edition of said regulations (hereinafter: Regulations) is applicable to the matter at hand as to the substance.

3. Subsequently, the DRC Judge referred to art. 3 par. 1 and 2 of the Procedural Rules and confirmed that, in accordance with art. 24 par. 1 and 2 in combination with art. 22 lit. b of the Regulations, he is competent to adjudicate on the present employment-related dispute between an Argentinian player and a Greek club.

4. His competence and the applicable regulations having been established, the DRC Judge entered into the substance of the matter, by acknowledging the above-mentioned facts as well as the documentation contained in the file in relation to the substance of the matter. 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.

5. In this respect, the DRC Judge recalled that the player and the club concluded an employment contract valid as from 7 August 2018 until 30 June 2019, according to which the player was entitled to a monthly salary in the amount of EUR 720 and a performance

6. The DRC Judge noted that the player, on 17 November 2019, put the club in default of payment of EUR 12,160.

7. Subsequently, the DRC Judge further observed that, after having put the club in default, the Claimant acknowledged having received the amount of EUR 302.48.

8. In this context, according to the Claimant’s claim, the DRC Judge noted that the Claimant alleged that the Respondent had failed to pay the outstanding amount of EUR 11,857.52.

9. Equally, the DRC Judge took note of the fact that the Respondent, for its part, maintained having paid to the player the amount of EUR 8,000. Furthermore, the club alleged that “the amount claimed by the player […] relates to gross earnings (not net / bank receipts are attached). As a consequence thereof, the club concluded that it fulfilled all its contractual obligations towards the player.

10. In continuation, the DRC Judge further noted that the Claimant confirmed having received the amount of EUR 8,000, but he insisted in the continuation of the proceedings as he deemed that the Respondent still owed him the amount of EUR 3,857.52.

11. With due consideration to the above, the DRC Judge highlighted that the underlying issue in this dispute was to determine whether the financial entitlements of the player were payable net or gross.

12. In this respect, the DRC Judge pointed out that the contract established an amount of remuneration payable to the Claimant, without making any reference as to whether such amount should be considered net or gross. In order to preserve the good faith of the Claimant when signing the contract, and in the absence of any evidence to the contrary, the DRC Judge concluded that the amount therein is to be considered as net.

13. Moreover, as regards the bank receipts provided by the Respondent, the DRC Judge further observed that none of those evidences indicated that the Respondent should withhold and deduct taxes from the Claimant’s remuneration.

14. On account of the above, the DRC Judge established that the Respondent’s explanations as regards the gross amount of the Claimant’s remuneration should not be upheld.

bonus of EUR 10,000 (cf. points I.2. and I.3. above).

15. 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 EUR 3,857.52 corresponding to the outstanding remuneration for April to June 2019, i.e. EUR 1,857.52, as well as the remainder of the performance bonus, i.e. EUR 2,000.

16. In view of the above, and in accordance with the principle of pacta sunt servanda, the DRC Judge determined that the club has to pay to the player the total amount of EUR 3,857.52 as outstanding remuneration.

17. In addition, taking into account the Claimant’s request as well as the constant practice of the DRC Judge in this regard, the Chamber decided that the Respondent must pay to the Claimant interest of 5% p.a. on the aforementioned amount as of the date of claim, i.e. 23 December 2019, until the date of effective payment.

18. Furthermore, taking into account the consideration under number II.2. above, the DRC 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 amount of outstanding remuneration.

19. 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 amount is paid and for the maximum duration of three entire and consecutive registration periods.

20. Therefore, bearing in mind the above, the DRC Judge decided that, in the event that the Respondent does not pay the amount 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. The DRC Judge recalled that the above-mentioned ban will be lifted immediately and prior to its complete serving upon payment of the due amount, in accordance with art. 24bis par. 3 of the Regulations.

22. The DRC Judge concluded his deliberations in the present matter by establishing that any further claims lodged by the player are rejected.

***

III. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) Judge

1. The claim of the Claimant, Jeronimo Jorge Barrales, is partially accepted.

2. The Respondent, PAS LAMIA 1964 FC, has to pay the Claimant EUR 3,857.52, plus interest at the rate of 5% p.a. as from 23 December 2019 until the date of effective payment.

3. Any further claim lodged by the Claimant is rejected.

4. The Claimant is directed to inform the Respondent, immediately and directly, preferably to the e-mail address as indicated on the cover letter of the present decision, of the relevant bank account to which the Respondent must pay the amount plus interest mentioned under point III.2. above.

5. The Respondent shall provide evidence of payment of the due amount plus interest in accordance with point III.2. above to FIFA to the e-mail address psdfifa@fifa.org, duly translated into one of the official FIFA languages (English, French, German, Spanish).

6. In the event that the amount plus interest due in accordance with point III.2. 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 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 (cf. art. 24bis of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players).

7. The ban mentioned in point III.6. above will be lifted immediately and prior to its complete serving, once the due amounts plus interest are paid.

8. In the event that the aforementioned sum plus interest 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 FIFA’s Disciplinary Committee for consideration and a formal decision.

***

Note related to the publication:

The FIFA administration may publish decisions issued by the Players’ Status Committee or the Dispute Resolution Chamber. Where such decisions contain confidential information, 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 Rules Governing the Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber).

Note relating to the motivated decision (legal remedy):

According to art. 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 (CAS)

Avenue de Beaumont 2

CH-1012 Lausanne

Switzerland

Tel: +41 21 613 50 00

Fax: +41 21 613 50 01

e-mail: info@tas-cas.org

For the Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) Judge:

Emilio García Silvero

Chief Legal & Compliance Officer