F.I.F.A. – Dispute Resolution Chamber / Camera di Risoluzione delle Controversie – labour disputes / controversie di lavoro (2020-2021) – fifa.com – atto non ufficiale – Decision 10 December 2020

Decision of the

Dispute Resolution Chamber

passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 10 December 2020,

regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the player Myroslav Slavov

COMPOSITION:

Geoff Thompson (England), Chairman Angela Collins (Australia), member Aby Nayeem Shohag (Bangladesh), member

CLAIMANT:

MYROSLAV SLAVOV, Ukraine

RESPONDENT:

SHAHR KHODROU, IR Iran

Haga clic o pulse aquí para escribir texto.

I. FACTS

1. On 23 January 2020, the player and the club signed a contract, valid for “two years and half”, according to which the player was entitled to receive the following amounts:

Season 2019/2020 the total amount of USD 100,000:

- USD 50,000, payable when “the contract is concluded”;

- USD 50,000, payable in 5 monthly instalments “at the end of twenty-eight day of each month”.

Season 2020/2021 the total amount of USD 150,000:

- USD 50,000, payable at “the beginning of the season 2020-2021”;

- USD 10,000, payable “monthly up to the contract” “at the end of twenty-eight day of each month”.

Season 2021/2022 the total amount of USD 200,000:

- USD 100,000, payable at “the beginning of the season “2021-2020”;

- USD 10,000, payable “during ten months up to the contract” “at the end of twenty-eight day of each month”.

Furthermore, the contract provides for a bonus of USD 10,000 in case of qualification for the Asian Champions League, “except play off”.

2. On 14 March 2020, the club gave the player “written permission to fly home to Vienna due to league closure and Persian New Year holiday”.

3. Moreover, on 15 March 2020, the player signed a document that was handed over to him by the club on the airport, when he was about to fly home, in which the player declared that the club offered him an apartment that “didn’t suit his taste” and that the club will pay the delayed salaries until 24 April 2020.

4. On 2 June 2020, the agent of the player put the club in default for the outstanding amounts due under the contract, as well as the costs for a visa and flight ticket.

5. On 6 June 2020, the club replied that the player would receive all his dues when he would arrive in Iran and also sent the player a flight ticket. As result, the player arrived on 18 June 2020 in Iran, however no one from the club was waiting.

6. In view of the foregoing, on 21 June 2020, the player unilaterally terminated the contract due the outstanding amounts and lack of communication from the club’s side.

7. On 8 October 2020, the player lodged a claim against the club, claiming the payment of outstanding remuneration and compensation or breach of contract, specified as follows:

Outstanding remuneration:

 USD 50,000, corresponding to the outstanding salaries in the period between February and June 2020.

Compensation for breach of contract:

 USD 350,000 as remaining value of the contract in the 2020/2021 and 2021/2022 seasons;

 USD 10,000 as bonus for the qualification for the group stage of the AFC Champions League 2020.

8. In his claim, the player explains that the club failed to make any of the payments due under the contract, as well as that the club, on 14 March 2020, gave him “written permission to fly home to Vienna due to league closure and Persian New Year holiday”.

9. After arriving again in Iran on 18 June 2020, the club did not show longer any interest in his services and also failed to pay him the outstanding amounts due under the contract.

10. Despite having been invited to do so, the club failed to answer to the player’s claim.

11. The player informed that FIFA Administration that after the unilateral termination of the contract, he remained unemployed.

II. CONSIDERATIONS OF THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION CHAMBER

1. First of all, the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter also referred to as Chamber or DRC) analysed whether it was competent to deal with the case at hand. In this respect, it took note that the present matter was submitted to FIFA on 10 October 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.

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 (edition October 2020), the Dispute Resolution Chamber is competent to deal with the matter at stake. The matter concerns an employment-related dispute with an international dimension between a Ukrainian player and an Iranian club, and the competence is not disputed by the parties.

3. In continuation, the Chamber analysed which regulations should be applicable as to the substance of the matter. In this respect, the DRC confirmed that in accordance with art. 26 par. 1 and 2 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (October 2020 edition), and considering that the claim was lodged on 8 October 2020, the October 2020 edition of the aforementioned regulations (hereinafter: the 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 above-mentioned facts as well as the arguments and the documentation submitted by the parties. However, the Chamber 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. In continuation, the members of the Chamber noted that the player lodged a claim against the club, maintaining that he had terminated the employment contract with just cause on 21 June 2020, after previously having put the club in default, since the club allegedly failed to pay the player’s remuneration. In this respect, the player further explained that he got permission to fly home (Vienna, Austria) after the closure of the league in Iran on 14 March 2020 and that he received, after having sent his default letter, from the club a flight ticket to fly back to Iran on 18 June 2020. However, since on 18 June 2020 no one of the club showed up to take care and because of the fact that he still had not received his outstanding remuneration, the player unilaterally terminated the contract on 21 June 2020. Consequently, the player asks to be awarded his outstanding dues as well as the payment of compensation for breach of the employment contract.

6. The club, for its part, failed to present its response to the claim of the player, in spite of having been invited to do so. Consequently, the Chamber deemed that the club had renounced to its right of defence and, thus, had accepted the allegations of the player.

7. As a consequence of the aforementioned consideration, the members of the Chamber concurred that, in accordance with art. 9 par. 3 of the Procedural Rules, a decision shall be taken upon the basis of the documents already on file, in other words, upon the statements and documents presented by the player.

8. In accordance with the employment contract, the club - in addition to the sign-on fee of USD 50,000 that was allegedly paid - was obliged to pay to the player at the time the contract was terminated by the player, i.e. on 21 June 2020, the amount of EUR 50,000, corresponding to the five monthly salaries for the period between February and June 2020.

9. On account of the aforementioned, in particular in view of the considerations under point II./7. and II./8. above, the Chamber established that the club, without any valid reason, failed to remit to the player, until 21 June 2020, the date on which the player terminated the contract, the total amount of EUR 50,000. What is more, the Chamber wished to point out that the club did not communicate any further with the player, once he returned from Austria to Iran.

10. Consequently, and considering that the club had repeatedly and for a significant period of time been in breach of its contractual obligations towards the player and did not show sincere interest in him after his return to Iran, the Chamber decided that the player had just cause to unilaterally terminate the employment contract on 21 June 2020 and that, as a result, the club is to be held liable for the early termination of the employment contact with just cause by the player.

11. In continuation, having established that the club is to be held liable for the early termination of the employment contract with just cause by the player, the Chamber focused its attention on the consequences of such termination. In this regard, the members of the Chamber determined that the club was not only to pay the amount of EUR 50,000 as outstanding remuneration to the player, but also to pay compensation for breach of contract in conformity with art. 17 par. 1 of the Regulations.

12. Having stated the above, the Chamber turned to the calculation of the amount of compensation payable to the player by the club in the case at stake. In doing so, the members of the Chamber firstly recapitulated that, in accordance with art. 17 par. 1 of the Regulations, the amount of compensation shall be calculated, in particular and unless otherwise provided for in the contract at the basis of the dispute, with due consideration for the law of the country concerned, the specificity of sport and further objective criteria, including in particular, the remuneration and other benefits due to the player under the existing contract and/or the new contract, the time remaining on the existing contract up to a maximum of five years, and depending on whether the contractual breach falls within the protected period.

13. In application of the relevant provision, the Chamber held that it first of all had to clarify as to whether the pertinent employment contract contained a provision by means of which the parties had beforehand agreed upon an amount of compensation payable by the contractual parties in the event of breach of contract. In this regard, the Chamber established that no such compensation clause was included in the employment contract at the basis of the matter at stake.

14. As a consequence, the members of the Chamber determined that the amount of compensation payable by the club to the player had to be assessed in application of the other parameters set out in art. 17 par. 1 of the Regulations. The Chamber recalled that said provision provides for a non-exhaustive enumeration of criteria to be taken into consideration when calculating the amount of compensation payable

15. Bearing in mind the foregoing as well as the claim of the player, the Chamber proceeded with the calculation of the monies payable to the player under the terms of the employment contract until the end of the season 2021/2022. Consequently, the Chamber concluded that the amount of EUR 350,000 (i.e. the remuneration for the season 2020/2021 and 2021/2022) serves as the basis for the determination of the amount of compensation for breach of contract. In this respect, the Chamber pointed out that with regard to the bonus claimed by the player for the qualification for the group stage of the AFC Champions League 2020, said bonus payment could not be taken into account, as the player did not submit any evidence in relation to this part of the claim.

16. In continuation, the Chamber verified as to whether the player had signed an employment contract with another club during the relevant period of time, by means of which he would have been enabled to reduce his loss of income. According to the constant practice of the DRC, such remuneration under a new employment contract shall be taken into account in the calculation of the amount of compensation for breach of contract in connection with the player’s general obligation to mitigate his damages.

17. In this respect, the Chamber noted that the player informed the FIFA Administration that after the unilateral termination of the contract, he remained unemployed. As a result, no amounts were to be mitigated from the compensation awarded to the player.

18. Consequently, on account of all of the above-mentioned considerations and the specificities of the case at hand, the Chamber decided that the club must pay the amount of EUR 350,000 to the player, i.e. the residual value of the contract, which was to be considered a reasonable and justified amount of compensation for breach of contract in the present matter.

19. In conclusion, for all the above reasons, the Chamber decided to partially accept the player’s claim and that the club must pay to the player the amount of EUR 50,000 as outstanding remuneration and EUR 350,000 as compensation for breach of contract.

20. Furthermore, taking into account the consideration under number II./3. above, the Chamber 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.

21. In this regard, the Chamber 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.

22. Therefore, bearing in mind the above, the DRC decided that, in the event that the club does not pay the amounts due to the player within 45 days as from the moment in which the player, following the notification of the present decision, communicates the relevant bank details to the club, 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 club in accordance with art. 24bis par. 2 and 4 of the Regulations.

23. Finally, the Chamber 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 DISPUTE RESOLUTION CHAMBER

1. The claim of the Claimant, Myroslav Slavov, is partially accepted.

2. The Respondent has to pay to the Claimant the following amounts:

- USD 50,000 as outstanding remuneration.

- USD 350,000 as compensation for breach of contract without just cause.

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

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 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 Dispute Resolution Chamber:

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