F.I.F.A. – Camera di Risoluzione delle Controversie (2013-2014) – controversie di lavoro – ———- F.I.F.A. – Dispute Resolution Chamber (2013-2014) – labour disputes – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) judge passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 10 July 2013, by Philippe Diallo (France), DRC judge, on the claim presented by the player, Player H, from country A as Claimant against the club, Club S, from country I as Respondent regarding an employment-related dispute between the parties

F.I.F.A. - Camera di Risoluzione delle Controversie (2013-2014) - controversie di lavoro - ---------- F.I.F.A. - Dispute Resolution Chamber (2013-2014) - labour disputes – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) judge passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 10 July 2013, by Philippe Diallo (France), DRC judge, on the claim presented by the player, Player H, from country A as Claimant against the club, Club S, from country I as Respondent regarding an employment-related dispute between the parties I. Facts of the case 1. On 21 August 2010, Player H, from country A (hereinafter: the Claimant), and Club S, from country I (hereinafter: the Respondent), signed an employment contract (hereinafter: the contract) valid as from the day of signing until 21 August 2011. 2. According to the contract, the Respondent had to pay remuneration to the Claimant in the total amount of currency of country I 700,000,000 for the whole term of the contract. However, the contract does not specify the due date of the salary. 3. On 6 November 2012, the Claimant lodged a claim against the Respondent in front of FIFA requesting outstanding salaries in the amount of USD 50,000 plus 5 % interest p.a. on said amount as of 20 August 2011. 4. In this regard, the Claimant explained that he began to train and play with the Respondent and continued to do so during the whole season, even though the Respondent only paid remuneration in the amount of USD 10,000. 5. The Claimant stated that the amount of USD 10,000 received from the Respondent corresponded to the salaries of August and September 2010 and, therefore, the total claimed amount of USD 50,000 corresponded to the outstanding salaries of October, November and December 2010 and January to August 2011 in the amount of currency of country I 58,333,333 per month. 6. Despite having been invited by FIFA to provide its reply to the present matter, the Respondent did not answer to the Claimant’s claim. 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 6 November 2012. Consequently, the 2008 edition of the Rules Governing the Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: the Procedural Rules) is applicable to the matter at hand (cf. art. 21 of the 2008 and 2012 editions of the Procedural Rules). 2. Subsequently the DRC judge referred to art. 3 par. 2 and par. 3 of the Procedural Rules and confirmed that in accordance with art. 24 par. 1 and par. 2 in conjunction with art. 22 lit. (b) of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2012) he is competent to decide on the present litigation, which concerns an employment-related dispute with an international dimension between an country A player and an country I club. 3. In particular, and in accordance with art. 24 par. 2 lit. i) of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players, the DRC judge confirmed that he may adjudicate in the present dispute which value does not exceed currency of country H 100,000. 4. In continuation, the DRC judge analyzed which edition of the FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players should be 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 Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (editions 2010 and 2012), and, on the other hand, to the fact that the present claim was lodged in front of FIFA on 6 November 2012. The DRC judge concluded that 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. 5. Subsequently, the DRC judge duly noted that with regard to the fact that the employment contract at the basis of the dispute was concluded on 21 August 2010, and that the Claimant had lodged his claim on 6 November 2012, he should examine if the present claim should be considered as time-barred. 6. In this respect, the DRC judge referred to art. 25 par. 5 of the Regulations, which, in completion to the general procedural terms outlined in the Procedural Rules, clearly establishes that the decision-making bodies of FIFA shall not hear any dispute if more than two years have elapsed since the event giving rise to the dispute arose and that the application of this time limit shall be examined ex officio in each individual case. 7. In view of the above, the DRC judge deemed it fundamental to underline that in order to determine whether he could hear the present matter, he should, first and foremost, establish which is “the event giving rise to the dispute”, i.e. which is the starting point of the time period of two years as set out under art. 25 par. 5 of the Regulations. In this respect, the DRC judge referred to the claim of the Claimant, according to which the latter requested outstanding salaries for the period between October 2010 until August 2011. 8. On account of the foregoing and considering that the contract did not specify a payment date of the salaries, the DRC judge determined that the salaries fell due at the end of each working month. Consequently, the DRC judge decided that the event giving rise to the dispute and hereby the starting point of the time period of two years set out under art. 25 par. 5 of the Regulations regarding the salaries from October to November 2010 occurred on 31 October 2010 and 30 November 2010 respectively. 9. Therefore, the DRC judge held that the time period of the two years for the salaries of October and November 2010 had elapsed on 1 November 2012 and 1 December 2012 respectively. 10. As a consequence, recalling that the present claim was submitted to FIFA on 6 November 2012, the DRC judge concluded that the time limit of two years had elapsed for the salary of October 2010. Therefore, only part of the claim of the Claimant can be heard by the DRC judge, i.e. the claim for the salaries of November and December 2010 and as of January to August 2011. 11. The competence of the DRC judge and the applicable regulations having been established, the DRC judge entered into the substance of the matter. In doing so, he started by acknowledging the abovementioned facts of the case as well as the documentation contained in the file. 12. In this respect, the DRC judge acknowledged that the parties to the dispute had signed a valid employment contract on 21 August 2010, in accordance with which the Respondent would pay the Claimant a total remuneration in the amount of currency of country I 700,000,000. 13. 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 to its right of defence and, thus, accepted the allegations of the Claimant. 14. Furthermore, as a consequence of the aforementioned consideration, the DRC judge concurred that in accordance with art. 9 par. 3 of the Procedural Rules, he shall take a decision upon the basis of the documentation already on file; in other words, upon the statements and documents presented by the Claimant. 15. In continuation, the DRC judge acknowledged that, in accordance with the employment contract provided by the Claimant, the Respondent was obliged to pay to the Claimant the total amount of currency of country I 700,000,000 for the whole term of the contract. 16. In this respect, the DRC judge took into consideration that according to the Claimant, the Respondent had failed to pay his remuneration in the total amount of USD 50,000, corresponding to the unpaid salaries of October, November and December 2010 as well as of January until August 2011, in the amount of currency of country I 58,333,333 per month. Consequently, the Claimant requested to be awarded with the payment of the total amount of USD 50,000. 17. 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 outstanding remuneration with sufficient documentary evidence. 18. In particular, the DRC judge acknowledged that the Claimant held that he had received his salaries for the months of August and September 2010. In this regard, the DRC judge determined that the total amount of currency of country I 700,000,000 to which the Claimant was entitled to as per the employment contract, should have been paid by the Respondent throughout a period of thirteen months, i.e. the Claimant was entitled to a monthly salary of currency of country I 53,846,183.80. 19. On account of the aforementioned considerations, the DRC judge established that the Respondent failed to remit the Claimant’s monthly remuneration in the total amount of currency of country I 538,461,538 corresponding to 10 monthly salaries as from November 2010 until and including August 2011. 20. 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 outstanding remuneration in the total amount of currency of country I 538,461,538. 21. 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. on the amount of currency of country I 538,461,538 as from 20 August 2011 until the date of effective payment. 22. Finally, the DRC judge concluded his deliberations in the present matter by establishing that any further claim lodged by the Claimant is rejected. III. Decision of the DRC judge 1. The claim of the Claimant, Player H, from country A, is partially accepted. 2. The Respondent, Club S, from country I, has to pay to the Claimant, within 30 days as from the date of notification of this decision, the amount of currency of country I 538,461,538 plus 5% interest p.a. on said amount as of 20 August 2011 until the date of effective payment. 3. If the aforementioned sum is not paid by the Respondent within the stated time limit, the present matter shall be submitted, upon request, to the FIFA Disciplinary Committee for consideration and a formal decision. 4. Any further claim lodged by the Claimant is rejected. 5. The Claimant is directed to inform the Respondent immediately and directly of the account number to which the remittance is to be made and to notify the DRC judge of every payment received. ** 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: Jérôme Valcke Secretary General Encl. CAS directives