F.I.F.A. – Camera di Risoluzione delle Controversie (2015-2016) – controversie di lavoro – ———- F.I.F.A. – Dispute Resolution Chamber (2015-2016) – labour disputes – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 18 March 2016, in the following composition: Geoff Thompson (England), Chairman Philippe Piat (France), member John Bramhall (England), member Theodore Giannikos (Greece), member Zola Majavu (South Africa), member on the claim presented by the player, H, from country A, as Claimant against the club, Club E, from country B, as Respondent regarding an employment-related dispute arisen between the parties I

F.I.F.A. - Camera di Risoluzione delle Controversie (2015-2016) - controversie di lavoro – ---------- F.I.F.A. - Dispute Resolution Chamber (2015-2016) - labour disputes – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 18 March 2016, in the following composition: Geoff Thompson (England), Chairman Philippe Piat (France), member John Bramhall (England), member Theodore Giannikos (Greece), member Zola Majavu (South Africa), member on the claim presented by the player, H, from country A, as Claimant against the club, Club E, from country B, as Respondent regarding an employment-related dispute arisen between the parties I. Facts of the case 1. On 27 December 2014, the player H from country A, (hereinafter: the player or the Claimant), and the Club E, from country B (hereinafter: the club or the Respondent), concluded an employment contract (hereinafter: the contract), valid from the date of the signature until 10 June 2015. 2. According to art. 7.1. of the contract, the player was entitled to receive inter alia a total amount of USD 168,000 “(this amount is included in tax) for the player”. 3. Art. 7.2. further stipulates that “The player is obliged to pay his tax, and up to 20% of his contract will be decreased to pay to the country B tax office by the Club E. 40% from the net amount of the contract after tax reduction will be paid during sing of the contract after medical test will be paid to the player and in case of lack of payment the player will not attend in training session and 40% will be paid after 3 months later, and the rest will be paid at the end of football season. (amount paid to the player will be 140000 us.)”. 4. Moreover, according to art. 5.6 “The club is obliged to get the player and his wife two air tickets round trip for the 6 month contract”. 5. On 28 January 2015, the parties concluded an “Agreement” (hereinafter: the termination agreement) by means of which they mutually agreed to terminate their employment relationship. The parties agreed the following: a) The club has to pay the following amounts to the player: USD 35,000 on 12 March 2015; USD 34,000 on 12 April 2015. b) “4. In case the each mentioned payment is not made by the club, this agreement is not valid anymore; c) 5. In case, the club does not act in accordance with its obligation as stated above, the player has the right to follow his claim through FIFA for the total amount of the original contract; d) 6. The Club E is responsible for the taxation of the player”. 6. On 18 September 2015, the player sent a reminder to the club by means of which he claimed the total amount of USD 168,000, considering that the club did not respect the termination agreement, and giving it a deadline until 28 September 2015 to pay the requested amount, otherwise he will refer the case to FIFA. 7. On 29 September 2015, the player submitted a claim against the club in front of FIFA, requesting the payment of USD 172,000, plus 5% interest p.a. as from due dates, as follows: a) USD 168,000, corresponding to the entire value of the contract in accordance with art. 5. of the termination agreement (cf. point I.5.c) above); b) USD 4,000, corresponding to two flight tickets for the player and his wife (cf. point I.4. above). 8. The player explains that he was supposed to receive 40% of the sum of USD 168,000 as advance payment upon the signature of the contract (cf. point I.3. above), but did not. However, he continued to train with the club and was injured during a pre-season tournament, and required surgery. In view of these circumstances, according to the player, both parties agreed to sign the termination agreement (cf. point I.5. above). Finally, the player holds that despite its efforts to try to contact the club to receive the due amounts, until now the latter has failed to pay him and therefore he has the right to claim “through FIFA for the total amount of the original contract” cf. point I.5.c) above. 9. In its response to the player’s claim, the club first confirmed that the player was injured and claimed that the latter requested to terminate the contract. The club claims to have accepted such request club “on the basis of respect”. However, the club holds that the player signed an employment contract with the country E club, Club Y on the same day. 10. In continuation, the club acknowledged a debt of USD 69,000 towards the player but holds that the player did not inform it of his bank details and that it never received the reminder sent by the player. Furthermore, the club highlighted that due to the economic sanctions against country B, until now it was not possible to proceed to any financial transfer oversea. Finally, the club stated that it was ready to transfer the amount of USD 69,000 to the country A or country Z embassy in country B, upon request of the player. 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 29 September 2015. Consequently, the 2015 edition of the Rules Governing the Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: Procedural Rules) are applicable to the matter at hand (cf. article 21 of the Procedural Rules). 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 and par. 2 in combination with art. 22 lit. b) of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2015), the Dispute Resolution Chamber is competent to deal with the matter at stake, which concerns an employment-related dispute with an international dimension between a country A player and a country B club. 3. Furthermore, the Chamber analysed which regulations should be applicable as to the substance of the matter. In this respect, it confirmed that in accordance with art. 26 par. 1 and 2 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2015), and considering that the present claim was lodged on 29 September 2015, the 2015 edition of said regulations (hereinafter: 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. The members of the Chamber started by acknowledging the facts of the case, as well as the documentation contained in the file. However, the Chamber emphasised that in the following considerations it will refer only to facts, arguments and documentary evidence which it considered pertinent for the assessment of the matter at hand. 5. First and foremost, the Chamber acknowledged that the parties had concluded an employment contract valid from 27 December 2014 until 10 June 2015, according to which the Claimant was entitled to the monies detailed in points I.2. to I.4. above. Furthermore, the DRC took note that the parties had terminated their employment relation by mutual consent by entering on 28 January 2015 into a termination agreement, the terms of which are detailed in point I. 5. above. 6. In continuation, the members of the Chamber noted that the Claimant contacted FIFA on 29 September 2015 indicating that the Respondent had not fulfilled its obligations as established in the termination agreement, since it had not paid the agreed amounts. Consequently, the Claimant asks that the Respondent be ordered to pay the total amount of USD 172,000 plus 5% interest p.a., allegedly corresponding to the entire value of the contract. 7. The Chamber took into account that the Respondent, for its part, admits that it owes part of the amount to the Claimant, i.e. USD 69,000, and that, thus, the Respondent confirms that it has not made such payment to the Claimant allegedly because it did not have the player’s bank details in its possession or receive a reminder from the Claimant. 8. Before entering the analysis of the parties’ arguments, the DRC deemed it appropriate to briefly refer to the content of the settlement agreement concluded by the parties on 28 January 2015. In accordance with art. 5. of the settlement agreement (cf. pt. I.5. above), in case of non-compliance of the Respondent with any of the payments therein established, the player shall be entitle to claim “through FIFA for the total amount of the original contract”. In view of the club’s uncontested non-compliance with the settlement agreement, as well as of the clear wording of art. 5. of such agreement, the Chamber concluded that the legal document at the basis of the present dispute is the termination agreement of 28 January 2015. 9. Having said that, the Chamber entering the analysis of the parties’ arguments, referred to art. 12 par. 3 of the Procedural Rules and concurred that the Respondent did not provide any valid reason not to comply with its obligations towards the Claimant as per the termination agreement. 10. On account of the aforementioned considerations, the Chamber decided that in accordance with the general legal principle of pacta sunt servanda, the Respondent is liable to pay to the Claimant the amount of USD 168,000, considered to be the total value of the original contract in accordance with the termination agreement (cf. points I.1. and I.5. above). 11. In continuation and with regard to the Claimant's request for interest, the DRC decided that the Claimant is entitled to receive interest at the rate of 5% p.a. as from 13 March 2015, i.e. the date on which the total amount of USD 168,000 fell due in the light of the Respondent’s failure to pay the first instalment in a timely manner, in accordance with the termination agreement (cf. point I.5. above). 12. With regard to the Claimant’s claim for flight tickets, in the amount of USD 4,000, the Chamber once again referred to art. 12. par. 3 of the Procedural Rules and pointed out that no evidence of purchase of such tickets by the Claimant was provided. Therefore, this amount cannot be granted to him. 13. The DRC concluded its deliberations in the present matter by establishing that the claim of the Claimant is partially accepted. ***** III. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber 1. The claim of the Claimant, player H, is partially accepted. 2. The Respondent, Club E, has to pay to the Claimant, within 30 days as from the date of notification of this decision, the amount of USD 168,000 plus 5% interest p.a. as from 13 March 2015. 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 Dispute Resolution Chamber 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 Dispute Resolution Chamber: Marco Villiger Deputy Secretary General (Administration) Encl. CAS directives