FIFA - Decisión disputa Del Valle Rodriguez 14092023

REF. FPSD-11193

Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber passed on 14 September 2023 regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the player Yonathan Alexander Del Valle Rodriguez BY: Jorge Gutierrez (Costa Rica), Single Judge

CLAIMANT:

Yonathan Alexander Del Valle Rodriguez, Venezuela Represented by Mehmet Göktürk Aslan

RESPONDENT:

Eyüpspor Kulübü Derneği, Türkiye Represented by Ercan Sevdimbaş pg. 2

REF. FPSD-11193

I. Facts of the case

1. The parties to the dispute are the Venezuelan player, Yonathan Alexander del Valle Rodriguez

(hereinafter: the Claimant or the player), and the Turkish club, Eyüpspor KD (hereinafter: the Respondent or the club).

2. On an unspecified date, the Claimant and the Respondent concluded an employment contract

(hereinafter: the contract), valid as from 26 January 2023 until 31 May 2023.

3. Under the contract, the Respondent undertook to pay to the Claimant a “minimum wage”.

4. On 25 January 2023, the parties signed a protocol, according to which the player inter alia was entitled to EUR 85,000 net, to be paid in 5 instalments of EUR 17,000 each, as well as unspecified “living costs”.

5. By correspondence dated 17 June 2023, the Claimant put the Respondent in default of payment of EUR 59,400, being EUR 48,000 as salaries and EUR 11,400 as rent, granting the club 10 days to cure the breach.

6. By response dated 22 June 2023, the club explained to the player that it understood to owe him EUR 31,000 as salaries and denied the amount of EUR 11,400 due as rent allowance, stating that the appropriate amount was only EUR 1,000 per month.

7. On 3 August 2023, the player lodged the claim at hand before FIFA and against the club, seeking the

following relief: “As a consequence of all of the above, the Player is requesting the FIFA DRC to apply the corresponding sanctions to the Club on the basis of art. 12bis of the FIFA RSTP and to order the Club to pay him the following outstanding amount: • EUR 59.400 net plus 5% interests as of the corresponding due dates until the effective day of payment. • Alternatively, EUR 55.967,74 plus 5% interest as of the due dates”

8. In his claim, the player explained that the club failed to pay him EUR 59.400 net, as follows: • EUR 11.400 due as rent in February 2023 • EUR 14.000 due as the remaining salary of March 2023 • EUR 17.000 due as the salary of April 2023 • EUR 17.000 due as salary of May 2023

9. The player further invokes article 12bis of the FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players

(RSTP) and asks FIFA to sanction the club and order it to pay the outstanding amount plus interests.

10. As to the alternative claim, the player explained as follows: pg. 3

REF. FPSD-11193 “Alternatively, regarding the rent’s payment, the Player is requesting the FIFA DRC to at least award him EUR 7.967,74 as the pro-rata amount for the length of the employment contract i.e. 26 January to 31 May 2023, during which the Club was obligated to cover the Player’s living costs.”

11. It is to be noted that in support of his claim, the player filed an unsigned copy of a rental agreement.

12. In its reply, the Respondent held that it paid EUR 54,176 to the player throughout the season, and presented some payment receipts in this respect, as detailed in continuation. As such, it argued that the debt amounted to EUR 30,824 only, and provided banking receipts in support of this

argument: a. EUR 17,000 on 10 April 2023.

b. EUR 20,000 on 25 May 2023. c. TRY 375,000 on 30 May 2023, equivalent to EUR 17,176.

13. As to the rent, the club argued as follows: “In addition, although a rental fee of EUR 11.400has been demanded by the Player, the Club does not have such a debt. Namely, it is also accepted by the Player that 11.400,- EUR covers a 6-month rental period. But the Protocol between the Parties states that the Club will only pay the rental fee for the duration of the contract. The contract between the parties does not cover 6 months and is only valid for 4 months. Therefore it is not possible for the club to pay 6 months rent. The rent that can be requested at the club is 7.600,-EUR for a period of 4 months. For this reason, we hereby would like to ask your honorable commitee to refuse the Claimant's demands.

Also we hereby would like to state that the rental agreement is dated 10.08.2022. At that time there was no agreement between the Parties. The Player was playing in Super League Club at that time, so the conditions of the Super League is better than the 1st League in Turkey, that shows the rental fee is not appropriate as agreed in the contract between the Parties. For this reason, we hereby would like your honorable chamber to reduce the rental fee taking account of the difference of the leagues and also the agreed rental fee between the Parties was "appropriate" but the demanded rental fee is not appropriate.”

14. The club filed the following request for relief: “7.1 The reasons explained above we kindly request you to decide judgment of dismissal about the present case. 7.2 Consider the amounts paid and good faith of the Respondent while evaluating the Claimant requests according to the reasons explained above and according to the bank receipts which was provided by the Respondent and set off the mentioned amount from the Claimant's requests.

7.3 Finally, we would like to request your honorable chamber to make a decision that the judicial costs pg. 4 REF. FPSD-11193 and the attorneyship fees that the Respondent is faced with shall be paid by the Claimant. If not, to award a minimum amount of procedural cost in connection with the temporary amendment to the Procedural Rules declared with the Circular 1720.”

15. Upon request from the FIFA general secretariat, the Claimant informed as follows as to the payments alleged by the Respondent: “In this regard, we can confirm that the amount of TRY 350,000 (EUR 17,176) has been received by the Player and was not acknowledged yet when filing his claim. The amounts of EUR 17,000 and EUR 20,000 were already acknowledged by the player prior to filing the claim. As a result, only the amount of TRY 375,000 (EUR 17,176) can be deducted from the amounts requested in the original claim, leaving the following request for relief: •EUR 42,224 net plus 5% interest as of the due dates. •Alternatively, EUR 38,791.74 plus 5% interest as of the due dates.”

II. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber

a. Competence and applicable legal framework

16. First of all, the Single Judge (hereinafter also referred to as Single Judge) analysed whether he was competent to deal with the case at hand. In this respect, he took note that the present matter was presented to FIFA on 3 August 2023 and submitted for decision on 14 September 2023. Taking into account the wording of art. 34 of the March 2023 edition of the Procedural Rules Governing the Football Tribunal (hereinafter: the Procedural Rules), the aforementioned edition of the Procedural Rules is applicable to the matter at hand.

17. Subsequently, the Single Judge referred to art. 2 par. 1 and art. 24 par. 1 lit. a) of the Procedural

Rules and observed that in accordance with art. 23 par. 1 in combination with art. 22 par. 1 lit. b) of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (May 2023 edition), he is competent to deal with the matter at stake, which concerns an employment-related dispute with an international dimension between a Venezuelan player and a Turkish club.

18. Subsequently, the Single Judge analysed which 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 2 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (May 2023 edition), and considering that the present claim was lodged on 03 August 2023, the same edition of said regulations (hereinafter: the Regulations) is applicable to the matter at hand as to the substance.

b. Burden of proof pg. 5

REF. FPSD-11193

19. The Single Judge recalled the basic principle of burden of proof, as stipulated in art. 13 par. 5 of the Procedural Rules, according to which a party claiming a right on the basis of an alleged fact shall carry the respective burden of proof. Likewise, he stressed the wording of art. 13 par. 4 of the Procedural Rules, pursuant to which he may consider evidence not filed by the parties, including without limitation the evidence generated by or within the Transfer Matching System (TMS).

c. Merits of the dispute

20. The competence and the applicable regulations having been established, the Single Judge entered into the merits of the dispute. In this respect, he started by acknowledging all the above-mentioned facts as well as the arguments and the documentation on file. However, he emphasised that in the following considerations he will refer only to the facts, arguments, and documentary evidence, which he considered pertinent for the assessment of the matter at hand.

1. Main legal discussion and considerations

21. The foregoing having been established, the Single Judge moved to the substance of the matter and

took note of the fact that this is a claim for overdue payables, in which both a partial payment has been acknowledged by the player and he is also seeking salaries and rent allowances.

22. In this respect, the Single Judge remarked that while part of the salaries undisputedly remained unpaid, the evidence presented by the player is insufficient to establish the amounts sought regarding the rent, because the provided inly an unsigned rental agreement for a period of time which did not match that of the contract.

23. At the same time, the Single Judge did notice that the club admitted in its reply to the default notice that an amount of EUR 1,000 was due as rent.

24. As a consequence, and in accordance with the general legal principle of pacta sunt servanda, the Single Judge decided that the Respondent is liable to pay to the Claimant the amounts which were outstanding under the contract as detailed in continuation. As established under the protocol, the

amounts must be awarded net: a. EUR 5,000 as rent. b. EUR 14,000 as the remaining salary of March 2023. c. EUR 17,000 due as the salary of April 2023. d. EUR 17,000 due as salary of May 2023. e. Minus EUR 17,176 which were undisputedly paid.

TOTAL: EUR 35,824

25. In addition, taking into consideration the Claimant’s request as well as the constant practice of the Football Tribunal in this regard, the Single Judge decided to award the Claimant interest at the rate of 5% p.a. on the outstanding amounts as from their respective due dates until the date of effective payment. pg. 6

REF. FPSD-11193 ii. Article 12bis of the Regulations

26. In continuation, the Single Judge referred to art. 12bis par. 2 of the Regulations, which stipulates that any club found to have delayed a due payment for more than 30 days without a prima facie

contractual basis may be sanctioned in accordance with art. 12bis par. 4 of the Regulations.

27. To this end, the Single Judge confirmed that the player put the club in default of payment of the amounts sought, which had fallen due more than 30 days before, and granted the club a 10-day deadline to cure such breach of contract.

28. Accordingly, the Single Judge confirmed that the club had delayed a due payment without a prima facia contractual basis. It followed that the criteria enshrined in art. 12bis of the Regulations was met in the case at hand.

29. The Single Judge further established that by virtue of art. 12bis par. 4 of the Regulations he has competence to impose sanctions on the club. On account of the above and bearing in mind that this is the first offense by the club within the last two years, the Single Judge decided to impose a warning on the club in accordance with art. 12bis par. 4 lit. a) of the Regulations.

30. In this connection, the Single Judge highlighted that a repeated offence will be considered as an aggravating circumstance and lead to a more severe penalty in accordance with art. 12bis par. 6 of the Regulations. iii. Compliance with monetary decisions

31. Finally, taking into account the applicable Regulations, the Single Judge referred to art. 24 par. 1 and 2 of the Regulations, which stipulate that, with its decision, the pertinent FIFA deciding body shall also rule on the consequences deriving from the failure of the concerned party to pay the relevant amounts of outstanding remuneration and/or compensation in due time.

32. In this regard, the Single Judge highlighted that, against clubs, the consequence of the failure to pay the relevant amounts in due time shall consist of a ban from registering any new players, either nationally or internationally, up until the due amounts are paid. The overall maximum duration of the registration ban shall be of up to three entire and consecutive registration periods.

33. Therefore, bearing in mind the above, the Single Judge decided that the Respondent must pay the full amount due (including all applicable interest) to the Claimant within 45 days of notification of the decision, failing which, at the request of the Claimant, a ban from registering any new players, either nationally or internationally, for the maximum duration of three entire and consecutive registration periods shall become immediately effective on the Respondent in accordance with art. 24 par. 2, 4, and 7 of the Regulations. pg. 7

REF. FPSD-11193

34. The Respondent shall make full payment (including all applicable interest) to the bank account provided by the Claimant in the Bank Account Registration Form, which is attached to the present decision.

35. The Single Judge recalled that the above-mentioned ban will be lifted immediately and prior to its complete serving upon payment of the due amounts, in accordance with art. 24 par. 8 of the

Regulations. d. Costs

36. The Single Judge referred to art. 25 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules, according to which “Procedures are free of charge where at least one of the parties is a player, coach, football agent, or match agent”.

Accordingly, the Single Judge decided that no procedural costs were to be imposed on the parties.

37. Likewise, and for the sake of completeness, the Single Judge recalled the contents of art. 25 par. 8 of the Procedural Rules, and decided that no procedural compensation shall be awarded in these proceedings.

38. Lastly, the Single Judge concluded its deliberations by rejecting any other requests for relief made by any of the parties. pg. 8

REF. FPSD-11193

III. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber

1. The claim of the Claimant, Yonathan Alexander Del Valle Rodriguez, is partially accepted.

2. The Respondent, Eyüpspor Kulübü Derneği, must pay to the Claimant the following amount(s):

a. EUR 1,000 net as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 February 2023 until the date of effective payment; b. EUR 1,000 net as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 March 2023 until the date of effective payment; c. EUR 15,000 net as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 April 2023 until the date of effective payment; d. EUR 18,000 net as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 May 2023 until the date of effective payment; e. EUR 824.00 net as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as from 1 June 2023 until the date of effective payment.

3. Any further claims of the Claimant are rejected.

4. A warning is imposed on the Respondent.

5. Full payment (including all applicable interest) shall be made to the bank account indicated in the

enclosed Bank Account Registration Form.

6. Pursuant to art. 24 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players, if full payment (including all applicable interest) is not made within 45 days of notification of this decision, the following

consequences shall apply:

1. The Respondent shall be banned from registering any new players, either nationally or internationally, up until the due amount is paid. The maximum duration of the ban shall be of up to three entire and consecutive registration periods.

2. The present matter shall be submitted, upon request, to the FIFA Disciplinary Committee in the event that full payment (including all applicable interest) is still not made by the end of the three entire and consecutive registration periods.

7. The consequences shall only be enforced at the request of the Claimant in accordance with art. 24 par. 7 and 8 and art. 25 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players.

8. This decision is rendered without costs.

For the Football Tribunal: Emilio García Silvero Chief Legal & Compliance Officer pg. 9

REF. FPSD-11193

NOTE RELATED TO THE APPEAL PROCEDURE: According to article 57 par. 1 of the FIFA Statutes, this decision may be appealed against before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) within 21 days of receipt of the notification of this decision.

NOTE RELATED TO THE PUBLICATION: FIFA may publish this decision. For reasons of confidentiality, FIFA may decide, at the request of a party within five days of the notification of the motivated decision, to publish an anonymised or a redacted version (cf. article 17 of the Procedural Rules Governing the Football

Tribunal).

CONTACT INFORMATION

Fédération Internationale de Football Association FIFA-Strasse 20 P.O. Box 8044 Zurich Switzerland www.fifa.com | legal.fifa.com | psdfifa@fifa.org | T: +41 (0)43 222 7777 pg. 10