F.I.F.A. – Dispute Resolution Chamber / Camera di Risoluzione delle Controversie – labour disputes / controversie di lavoro (2017-2018) – fifa.com – atto non ufficiale – Decision 30 November 2017
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 30 November 2017,
in the following composition:
Thomas Grimm (Switzerland), Deputy Chairman
Roy Vermeer (Netherlands), member
Stefano Sartori (Italy), member
Pavel Pivovarov (Russia), member
Jérôme Perlemuter (France), member
on the claim presented by the player,
Player A, Country B
as Claimant
against the club,
Club C, Country D
as Respondent
regarding an employment-related dispute between the parties
I. Facts of the case
1. On 19 January 2016, the player of Country B, Player A (hereinafter: player or Claimant) and the club of Country D, Club C (hereinafter: club or Respondent) concluded an employment contract (hereinafter: contract) valid as from 21 January 2016 until 30 June 2016.
2. According to said contract, the club undertook to pay the player the following monies:
- USD 200,000 “to be paid within January 2016”;
- USD 300,000 in monthly instalments of USD 60,000 each between February and June 2016.
3. On 1 December 2016, the player put the club in default and requested payment of the total amount of USD 500,000 until 10 December 2016.
4. On 18 May 2017, the player lodged a claim in front of FIFA against the club maintaining that the club failed to comply with its contractual obligations arising from the contract and requested to be awarded payment of the total amount of USD 500,000 “plus interest”.
5. In his arguments, the player held that the claimed amount remained unpaid, even though he put the club in default.
6. Furthermore, the player argued that mediation in front of the Football Association of Country D did not succeed.
7. In its answer, the club argued that FIFA would not be competent as allegedly bankruptcy proceedings in Country D were initiated and since courts of Country D might rule on the player’s requests.
8. The club further pointed out that it already submitted a letter to the “Department of Liquidations” in Country D in order to start bankruptcy proceedings. According to the club, the “Ministry of Sports and Culture” in Country D is currently trying to renegotiate the club’s liabilities.
9. As to the substance of the matter, the club did not deny owing the player the claimed amount, but held being in financial difficulties caused by its previous management.
10. In this context, the club tried to amicably settle the dispute with the player and proposed to pay a lump-sum of USD 250,000 to the player. Said proposal was rejected by 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 matter at hand. In this respect, it took note that the present matter was submitted to FIFA on 18 May 2017. Consequently, the Rules governing the procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber (edition 2017; hereinafter: Procedural Rules) are applicable to the matter at hand (cf. art. 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 in combination with art. 22 lit. b of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2016) the Dispute Resolution Chamber would, in principle, be competent to deal with the matter at stake, which concerns an employment-related dispute with an international dimension between a player of Country B and a club of Country D.
3. Notwithstanding the above, the Chamber acknowledged that the Respondent contested the competence of FIFA’s deciding body on the basis of the allegation that bankruptcy proceedings in Country D were reportedly initiated.
4. In this regard, the DRC noted that the Claimant held that FIFA has competence to deal with the present matter.
5. Taking into account that the Respondent did not submit any evidence in support of its allegation, the Chamber established that the Respondent’s objection to the competence of FIFA to deal with the present matter has to be rejected and that the Dispute Resolution Chamber is competent, on the basis of art. 22 lit. b) of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players, to deal with the present matter as to the substance.
6. Having concluded the above, 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 2016), and considering that the present claim was lodged on 18 May 2017, the 2016 edition of said regulations (hereinafter: Regulations) is applicable to the matter at hand as to the substance. In particular, there is no evidence on file that the club is going through any kind of insolvency proceedings. In any case, the DRC recalled that it remains competent as long as the club is affiliated to the Football Association of Country D.
7. 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.
8. In this respect, the Chamber recalled that, on 19 January 2016, the parties had signed an employment contract valid as from 21 January 2016 until 30 June 2016, in accordance with which the Respondent undertook to pay to the Claimant the total amount of USD 500,000 during the course of the contractual relationship.
9. Furthermore, the Chamber took note that the Claimant alleged that he did not receive any payment of the Respondent and therefore even after he put the club in default. In this regard, the Claimant lodged a claim in front of FIFA against the respondent seeking payment of USD 500,000 “plus interest”.
10. The DRC further noted that the Respondent, for its part, did not deny the debt towards the player, but held being in financial difficulties caused by its previous management.
11. Consequently, the Chamber considered that the Respondent had not presented any valid reasons why the payments remained unpaid.
12. In view of all the above and, in particular, taking into account that the Respondent did not contest that the relevant salaries had remained unpaid, the DRC decided to accept the player’s claim and that, in accordance with the general legal principle of pacta sunt servanda, the Respondent must fulfil its contractual obligations towards the Claimant. In view of the above, the Respondent is held to be liable to pay to the Claimant the amount of USD 500,000 corresponding to outstanding remuneration.
13. In addition, taking into account the Claimant’s request, the Chamber decided that the Respondent must pay to the Claimant interest of 5% p.a. on the amount USD 500,000 as of the date on which the claim was lodged, i.e. 18 May 2017, until the date of effective payment.
III. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1. The claim of the Claimant, Player A, is admissible.
2. The claim of the Claimant is accepted.
3. The Respondent, Club C, has to pay to the Claimant, within 30 days as from the date of notification of this decision, outstanding remuneration in the amount of USD 500,000 plus 5% interest p.a. as of 18 May 2017 until the date of effective payment.
4. In the event that the aforementioned amount plus interest is not paid by the Respondent within the stated time limit, the present matter shall be submitted, upon request, to FIFA’s Disciplinary Committee for consideration and a formal decision.
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 article 58 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
For the Dispute Resolution Chamber:
Omar Ongaro
Football Regulatory Director
Encl: CAS directives