Decision of the. Dispute Resolution Chamber

Transcription

1 Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 15 February 2018, in the following composition: Thomas Grimm (Switzerland), Deputy Chairman Eirik Monsen (Norway), Member Stéphane Burchkalter (France), Member Philippe Diallo (France), Member Joseph Bell (Cameroon), 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 arisen between the parties

2 I. Facts of the case 1. After apparently previously having been contractually bound to Club C for the 2011/2012 season, on or about 20 June 2012, the player from country B, Player A (hereinafter: Claimant) and the club from country D, Club C (hereinafter: Respondent) signed an employment contract in order to renew their employment relationship, in the language of Country D (hereinafter: contract). The translation presented by the Claimant indicates a starting date in the language of Country D and refers to the end of league as end date. 2. According to article 3 of the contract, for the first year the player was entitled to a total remuneration of 950,000,000 in the currency of Country D to be paid as follows: 20% of the contract value to be paid at the end of each month as a monthly salary; 20% of the contract value to be paid on the date of signature; 20% of the contract value to be paid after half of the season; 20% of the contract value to be paid after the end of the season; and 20% to be paid as performance bonus, paid after the player s obligation fulfillment approved by the coach, manager and the club. 3. According to the information contained in the Transfer matching System (TMS), the 2012/2013 sporting season in Country D ended on 11 May On 10 June 2015, the Claimant lodged a claim before FIFA against the Respondent relating to outstanding remuneration, requesting to be awarded the amount of 950,000,000 plus 5% interest p.a. as from the respective due dates. 5. According to the Claimant, the contract was valid for the season, which allegedly ended on 30 June 2013, and even though he fulfilled his contractual obligations, the Respondent had failed to pay his remuneration. 6. The Respondent presented its reply to the claim by means of an unsolicited position after closure of the investigation into the matter. Player A, Country B / Club C, Country D Page 2 of 5

3 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 10 June Consequently, the Rules Governing the Procedures of the Players Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber (edition 2015; 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 highlighted 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 2018) the Dispute Resolution Chamber, would, in principle, be competent to deal with the matter at stake, which concerns an employmentrelated dispute with an international dimension between a player from country B and an club from country D. 3. Notwithstanding the above, bearing in mind that the employment contract at the basis of the present matter was concluded on or about 20 June 2012 with a duration ending in 2013 and that the Claimant lodged his claim against the Respondent in front of FIFA on 10 June 2015, the members of the DRC considered that they should examine if the present claim, or any part of it, is barred by the statute of limitations. 4. Indeed, the members of the Chamber referred to art. 25 par. 5 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2018), which, in completion to the general procedural terms outlined in the Procedural Rules, clearly establishes that the Dispute Resolution Chamber 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. 5. In view of the above, the DRC deemed it fundamental to underline that in order to determine whether the Chamber could hear the present matter, it 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. 6. The members of the Chamber acknowledged that, according to the documents presented by the Claimant in support of his claim, the parties were bound by an employment contract, which was signed in the language of Country D and valid until the end of league The DRC duly noted that the Claimant was entitled to receive, inter alia, a total remuneration of 950,000,000 payable in several instalments, the last one to be paid after the end of the season and that Player A, Country B / Club C, Country D Page 3 of 5

4 the Claimant asked to be awarded payment of the full amount of 950,000,000. In other words, the Claimant s claim is based on the alleged non-payment of all of the contractual instalments. In this sense, the Chamber concluded that the alleged non-payment of the relevant instalments must be considered the events giving rise to the present dispute. 7. Furthermore, the Chamber took into account that, according to the information contained in the Transfer Matching System (TMS), the 2012/2013 season in Country D ended on 11 May The Claimant, for his part, maintained that the end date of the employment contract was 30 June Bearing in mind the discrepancy between the contractual duration indicated in the contract, in the TMS and indicated by the Claimant, while referring to the general principle of the burden of proof as outlined in art. 12 par. 3 of the Procedural Rules, the DRC underlined that the Claimant had not been able to corroborate his allegation that the employment contract was to last until 30 June 2013 with relevant documentation. 9. Having said that, the Chamber recalled that in accordance with art. 6 par. 3 of Annexe 3 of the aforementioned Regulations, FIFA may use, within the scope of proceedings pertaining to the application of the said Regulations, any documentation or evidence generated or contained in the TMS. On the basis of the information contained in the TMS in combination with the wording of the contract, the Chamber established that the end date of the relevant employment contract at the basis of the present dispute was 11 May In continuation, while recalling that the present claim was submitted to FIFA on 10 June 2015, the Chamber took into account that the amount claimed by the Claimant was payable in various instalments, all of which thus had fallen due more than two years prior to the date on which the Claimant lodged his claim in front of FIFA. 11. As a consequence, referring to art. 25 par. 5 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players, the DRC concluded that the time limit of two years for the Claimant to claim outstanding remuneration related to the 2012/2013 sporting season on the basis of the contract had elapsed at the time he lodged his claim in front of FIFA. 12. Therefore, the Chamber decided that the claim of the Claimant is barred by the statute of limitations and, consequently, inadmissible. Player A, Country B / Club C, Country D Page 4 of 5

5 III. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber The claim of the Claimant, Player A, is inadmissible. ***** Note relating to the motivated decision (legal remedy): According to art. 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 Lausanne Switzerland Tel: Fax: info@tas-cas.org For the Dispute Resolution Chamber: Omar Ongaro Football Regulatory Director Encl.: CAS directives Player A, Country B / Club C, Country D Page 5 of 5