F.I.F.A. – Camera di Risoluzione delle Controversie (2012-2013) – controversie di lavoro – ———- F.I.F.A. – Dispute Resolution Chamber (2012-2013) – labour disputes – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) judge passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 6 March 2013, by Theo van Seggelen (Netherland), DRC judge, on the claim presented by the player Player C, from country B as Claimant against the club Club A, from country U as Respondent regarding an employment-related dispute between the parties

F.I.F.A. - Camera di Risoluzione delle Controversie (2012-2013) - controversie di lavoro - ---------- F.I.F.A. - Dispute Resolution Chamber (2012-2013) - labour disputes – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) judge passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 6 March 2013, by Theo van Seggelen (Netherland), DRC judge, on the claim presented by the player Player C, from country B as Claimant against the club Club A, from country U as Respondent regarding an employment-related dispute between the parties I. Facts of the case 1. On 27 June 2008, Player C, from country B (hereinafter: the Claimant), and Club A, from country U (hereinafter: the Respondent), signed an employment contract (hereinafter: the contract), valid as from 1 July 2008 until 31 July 2010. 2. The contract, inter alia, entitled the Claimant to the following remuneration: For the season 2008/2009: - USD 1,150,000 as signing on fee; - USD 1,150,000 “divided equally as monthly salary”. For the season 2009/2010: - USD 1,150,000 payable at “the beginning of season 2009/2010”; - USD 1,150,000 “divided equally as monthly salary”. 3. On 20 July 2010, the Claimant signed a document named “Declaration”, by means of which the player declared to have received all his financial dues until 20 July 2010 “Thus, the club is totally acquitted from any financial obligations related to me in accordance to the contract that was signed between us on the date 01/07/2008”. 4. On the same date, i.e. on 20 July 2010, the Claimant and the Respondent signed an agreement (hereinafter: the agreement), by means of which the Respondent recognized to owe the Claimant the total outstanding remuneration of currency of country U 4,854,948, amount to be paid to the Claimant in the form of twelve postdated checks payable on the 10th of each month, in twelve consecutive monthly instalments as from 10 October 2010 as follows: - Currency of country U 1,000,000 divided into two checks of currency of country U 500,000 each, due for October and November 2010; - Currency of country U 385,000 due for December 2010; - Currency of country U 3,080,000 divided into eight checks of currency of country U 385,000 each, due for the months of January until August 2011; - Currency of country U 389,948 due for September 2011. 5. On 23 February 2011, the Claimant lodged a claim against the Respondent before FIFA, initially claiming the amount of USD 1,358,938 regarding the contract, composed of USD 853,315.02 due at the beginning of season 2009/2010 as well as USD 505,622.98, corresponding to approximately 5 monthly salaries from March until July 2010, plus 5% interest p.a. as from the due dates. 6. In this respect, the Claimant informed FIFA that even though he honoured the contract, the Respondent still owed the salaries due for Season 2009/2010. In this respect, the Claimant asserted that both parties signed the agreement in which the Respondent recognized outstanding amounts owed to the Claimant and therefore provided him with twelve post-dated checks that totalled currency of country U 4,854,948, which he could not cash for insufficiency of funds. Considering the Respondent did not comply with the agreement, the Claimant deems he is entitled to receive the amounts established in the contract. 7. The Respondent alleged having made a payment to the Claimant as per bank transfer in the amount of currency of country U 4,854,948, on 18 July 2011, enclosing a copy of the bank transfer. 8. The Claimant acknowledged having received the amount of USD 1,317,489.28 from the Respondent. However, the Claimant insisted that he was still entitled to receive the remaining amount of USD 41,448.72 plus interest, based on the contract, considering his initial claim (cf. point I.4) and the amounts paid by the Respondent after the claim was lodged. 9. In its reply, the Respondent asserted having already paid the Claimant as per the agreement and that the claim should be dismissed, since the contract was terminated by mutual agreement. 10. In his replica, the Claimant insisted that once the Respondent did not honour the agreement in the terms initially established, he is requesting the entire amount due as per the contract, deducting the amount paid in accordance with the agreement, as well as interests. 11. The Respondent again stated to have paid all due amounts as per the agreement and insisted that the Claimant have no further claims regarding the contract. In this respect, the Respondent made reference to the “Declaration” signed by the parties, by means of which the contractual relationship between the parties was allegedly terminated. Furthermore, the Respondent emphasised having fulfilled with its obligations as established in the agreement two months before the maturity date of the last instalment, i.e. September 2011. II. Considerations of the DRC judge 1. 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 23 February 2011. Consequently, the 2008 edition of the Rules Governing the Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: Procedural Rules) is applicable to the matter at hand (cf. article 21 par. 2 and 3 of the Procedural Rules). 2. Subsequently, the DRC judge referred to art. 3 par. 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 on the Status and Transfer of Players, the DRC judge is competent to deal with the matter at stake, which concerns an employment-related dispute with an international dimension between a country B player and an country U club. 3. Furthermore, the DRC judge analysed which edition of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players 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 (editions 2012 and 2010), and considering that the claim was lodged on 23 February 2011, the 2010 edition of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (hereinafter: the Regulations) is applicable to the matter at hand as to the substance. 4. The competence of the DRC judge and the applicable regulations having been established, the DRC judge entered into the substance of the matter. The DRC judge started by acknowledging the above-mentioned facts as well as the documentation contained in the file. 5. In this respect and first of all, the DRC acknowledged that it remained undisputed by the parties that, on 27 June 2008, the Claimant and the Respondent concluded an employment contract valid as from 1 July 2008 until 31 July 2010. Furthermore, the DRC judge acknowledged that it also remained undisputed that the Claimant signed the “Declaration”, by means of which he “totally acquitted” the Respondent “from any financial obligations related to [the Claimant] in accordance to the contract”. Additionally, the DRC judge took note that the Claimant and the Respondent concluded an agreement, dated 20 July 2010, by means of which the Respondent recognized that the Claimant was still entitled to receive the total amount of currency of country U 4,854,948 and that the Respondent would pay said amount in twelve consecutive monthly instalments. 6. In this respect, the DRC judge took due note that the Claimant originally requested the amount of USD 1,358,938 regarding outstanding remuneration, considering the contract. 7. The DRC judge took due note that, on the other hand, the Respondent partially accepted the Claimant’s claim, by paying the Claimant the total remuneration of currency of country U 4,854,948 as established in the agreement. 8. In this regard, the DRC judge acknowledged that the Claimant amended his initial claim, by accepting that the aforementioned payment had been made. The DRC judge further took note that the Claimant held that the amount of USD 41,448.72 still remained outstanding considering that his claim was based on the contract once the Respondent had not honoured the agreement as initially agreed. The Claimant deemed that the amount paid by the Respondent was based on the agreement. 9. Considering the opposite positions of the Claimant and the Respondent, the DRC judge analysed the documentation provided by the parties and concluded that eleven days before the expiry of the contract, i.e. on 20 July 2010, the Claimant signed the “Declaration”, stating that the Respondent had no further obligations regarding the contract. Moreover, on the same date, the parties concluded the agreement, by means of which it was established that the Respondent would pay the Claimant the total amount of currency of country U 4,854,948 in installments, the last one due on September 2011. 10. Considering all the above, the DRC judge concluded that the amounts established in the agreement settled the outstanding amounts related to the contract as well as that the contract was terminated by the parties. 11. Furthermore, the DRC judge emphasized that the Respondent accepted owing the Claimant the relevant amount based in the agreement and both parties acknowledged that the payment of currency of country U 4,854.948 had been made. 12. On account of all of the above, the DRC judge considered that the Claimant is no longer entitled to claim any amount regarding the contract. 13. In conclusion, the DRC judge decided to reject the claim of the Claimant. III. Decision of the DRC judge The claim of the Claimant, Player C, is rejected. ** Note relating to the motivated decision (legal remedy): According to art. 67 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 www.tas-cas.org For the DRC judge Markus Kattner Deputy Secretary General Encl. CAS directives