F.I.F.A. – Camera di Risoluzione delle Controversie (2014-2015) – controversie di lavoro – ———- F.I.F.A. – Dispute Resolution Chamber (2014-2015) – labour disputes – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) judge passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 20 August 2014, by DRC judge, on the claim presented by the player, Player M, from country R as Claimant against the club, Club L, from country F as Respondent regarding an employment-related dispute between the parties

F.I.F.A. - Camera di Risoluzione delle Controversie (2014-2015) - controversie di lavoro - ---------- F.I.F.A. - Dispute Resolution Chamber (2014-2015) - labour disputes – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) judge passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 20 August 2014, by DRC judge, on the claim presented by the player, Player M, from country R as Claimant against the club, Club L, from country F as Respondent regarding an employment-related dispute between the parties I. Facts of the case 1. On 23 July 2011, the player M from country R (hereinafter: the Claimant) and the Club L from country F (hereinafter: the Respondent), signed an employment contract valid as from 23 August 2011 until 30 April 2012 for an aggregate salary of EUR 14,000. 2. On 27 May 2012, the parties signed an agreement by means of the Respondent would pay the Claimant the total amount of EUR 6,200 in two instalments of EUR 3,100 each, on 30 June 2012 and 30 August 2012. 3. On 5 June 2013, the Claimant lodged a claim against the Respondent before FIFA maintaining that the latter had failed to comply with the above-mentioned agreement. 4. On account of the above, the Claimant requested to be awarded the amount of EUR 6,200 plus interest as from 30 April 2012, and “all interest accrued the total amount of € 335,48 Euros, without prejudice to vested until full payment.” 5. In its reply, the Respondent held that on the basis of its financial records, it already paid the Claimant the amount of EUR 4,200, leaving a balance of “EUR 2,200”. 6. The Claimant rejected however that he already received the amount of EUR 4,200. 7. Despite having been invited by FIFA to do so, the Respondent did not provide its final position. 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, the DRC judge took note that the present matter was submitted to FIFA on 5 June 2013. Consequently, the 2012 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 par. 1 and par. 2 of the Procedural Rules). 2. Subsequently, the DRC judge referred to art. 3 par. 2 and 3 of the Procedural Rules and confirmed that in accordance with art. 24 par. 1 and 2 in conjunction with art. 22 lit. b) of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players, edition 2014 (hereinafter: the Regulations), he is competent to decide on the present litigation, which concerns an employment-related dispute with an international dimension between a player M and a club L. 3. Furthermore, the DRC judge analysed which edition of the 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 par. 2 of the Regulations (edition 2012 and 2014), and considering that the present matter was submitted to FIFA on 5 June 2013, the 2012 edition of said Regulations is applicable to the present matter 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. In doing so, he started by acknowledging the above-mentioned facts of the case as well as the documentation contained in the file. 5. In this respect, the DRC judge acknowledged that the parties had signed an employment contract on 23 July 2011 and a private agreement on 27 May 2012, the latter stipulating that the Respondent would pay the Claimant the outstanding amount of EUR 6,200 in the following two instalments, (i) EUR 3,100 on 30 June 2012 and; (ii) EUR 3,100 on 30 August 2012. 6. In continuation, the DRC judge noted that the Claimant alleged that the Respondent had failed to respect the private agreement. Consequently, the Claimant asked to be awarded with the total amount of EUR 6,200, plus interest as from 30 April 2012. 7. Equally, the DRC judge took note of the reply of the Respondent, which asserted that it had already paid the Claimant the amount of EUR 4,200 and that, therefore, the outstanding amount corresponds to “EUR 2,200”. Nevertheless, the DRC judge equally observed that the Claimant denied having received the EUR 4,200. 8. On account of the above, the DRC judge recalled the basic principle of the burden of proof, as stipulated in art. 12 par. 3 of the Procedural Rules, according to which any party claiming a right on the basis of an alleged fact shall carry the respective burden of proof. In this respect, the DRC judge noted that the Respondent did not substantiate its defence, as it did not present any evidence in respect of the payment of EUR 4,200 it alleged to have paid to the Claimant. 9. As a result, the DRC judge concluded that the Respondent had not provided evidence of its defence and that, therefore, it could be established that the Respondent had failed to pay the Claimant the amount as agreed upon in the agreement dated 27 May 2012. Therefore, in accordance with the general legal principle of pacta sunt servanda, the Respondent must fulfil its obligations as per agreement and, consequently, is to be held liable to pay the outstanding amount of EUR 6,200 to the Claimant, plus 5% interest as from the due dates. 10. 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 M, is partially accepted. 2. The Respondent, club L, has to pay to the Claimant, within 30 days as from the date of notification of this decision, the amount of EUR 6,200 plus 5% interest p.a. until the date of effective payment as follows: - 5% p.a. as of 1 July 2012 on the amount of EUR 3,100; - 5% p.a. as of 31 August 2012 on the amount of EUR 3,100. 3. In the event that the aforementioned sum plus interest is not paid within the stated time limit, the present matter shall be submitted, upon request, to FIFA’s 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