FIFA - Decisión disputa Lopes Pereira 21082023

REF. FPSD-10754

Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber passed on 21 August 2023 regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the player Pedro Miguel De Almeida Lopes Pereira BY: Alejandro ATILIO TARABORELLI (Argentina & Italy)

CLAIMANT:

Pedro Miguel De Almeida Lopes Pereira, Portugal Represented by Nazim Burcin Celen

RESPONDENT:

Alanyaspor, Türkiye Represented by Sami Dinc pg. 2

REF. FPSD-10754

I. Facts of the case

1. On 18 August 2022, the Portuguese player Pedro Miguel De Almeida Lopes Pereira (hereinafter: the Claimant or the Player) and the Turkish club Alanyaspor (hereinafter: the Respondent or the Club) concluded an employment contract (hereinafter: the Contract) valid until 31 May 2023.

2. Art. 6 of the Contract reads inter alia as follows:

6.1Financial Benefits In Favor Of The Player For 2022/2023 Football Season: 393.750,00-Euro Net 18.750,00-Euro of the abovementioned total amount is to be paid to the Player by the Club until 30.03.2023. This payment is made in consideration of the whole service period of the Player during 2022/2023 football season and it shall be a progressed amount at the end of the football season. - 375.000,00-Euro of the abovementioned total amount is to be paid to the Player by the Club as the monthly salary in 10 (ten) equal installments (10 x 37.500,00-Euro) between the period September 2022 - June 2023. The monthly salaries are to be paid the last day of the relevant months

3. On 1 June 2023, the Claimant sent a default notice requesting the amount of EUR 150,000 to be paid within 10 days, to no avail.

II. Proceedings before FIFA

4. On 3 July 2023, the Claimant filed the claim at hand before FIFA. A brief summary of the position of the parties is detailed in continuation.

a. Position of the Claimant

5. The Claimant sustains that the Respondent has failed to pay the following amounts to the Claimant: 18.750,00.- Euro A part of the monthly salary of February 2023 37.500,00.- Euro Monthly salary of March 2023 18.750,00.- Euro Guarantee payment of 30.03.2023 37.500,00.- Euro Monthly salary of April 2023 37.500,00.- Euro Monthly salary of May 2023 37.500,00.- Euro Monthly salary of June 2023

6. The Claimant filed the following requests for relief: 7.1. The Claimant request your Chamber to make a decision that the Respondent has to pay the overdue net amount of €187.500,00.- (one hundred and eighty-seven thousand five hundred Euros) as of today with its interest at the rate of 5% per annum as from the dates stipulated herein below pg. 3

REF. FPSD-10754 respectively until the date of effective payment. 18.750,00.- Euro Part of the monthly salary of 01.02.2023 37.500,00.- Euro Monthly salary of 30.03.2023 18.750,00.- Euro Guarantee payment of 30.03.2023 37.500,00.- Euro Monthly salary of 30.04.2023 37.500,00.- Euro Monthly salary of 30.05.2023 37.500,00.- Euro Monthly salary of 30.06.2023 7.2. In consideration of the fact that the Respondent caused the Claimant to file the case herein, we would like to request your Chamber to make a decision that the judicial costs and the legal fees

that the Claimant is faced with shall be fully paid by the Respondent. b. Position of the Respondent

7. In its reply, the Respondent states that it made several payments to the Claimant.

8. The Respondent sustains that “According to the annexed payment receipts, it can clearly be seen that our Club pay to the player contractual payment of 206.250,00-Euro + additional payment of 209.6555,00-TL + bonus payment of 7.830,00-TL with regards to 2022/2023 football season's remunerations and in this context our Club completed its financial obligations towards the Player including but not limited to 2022/2023 football season remunerations.”

c. Comments of the Claimant

9. The Claimant was invited to comment of the alleged payments.

10. The Claimant underlines that the Respondent acknowledged it had paid EUR 206,250 to the Claimant as contractual payment. The Claimant states that “In line with this statement, the bank receipts also indicate that the Respondent’s contractual payments were made for September, October, November, December, January and February (half) salary payments”.

11. In this regard, the Claimant concludes that “the difference between the total receivables of the Claimant and the actual payments that were made by the Respondent is equal to the disputed amount that was requested by our Statement of Claim (393.750 - 206.250 = 187.500).”

12. The Claimant further states that “The other payments, were made by the Respondent with the explanation of “additional payments and bonus payments”. As the explanations indicate, these payments were off contract payments and made in return for the results of the matches and cannot be considered as salary payment”

13. The Claimant reiterates his previous requests for relief. pg. 4

REF. FPSD-10754

III. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber

a. Competence and applicable legal framework

14. 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 July 2023 and submitted for decision on 21 August 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.

15. 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), he is competent to deal with the matter at stake, which concerns an employment-related dispute with an international dimension between an Portuguese player and a Turkish club.

16. 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 3 July 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

17. 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.

c. Merits of the dispute

18. His competence and the applicable regulations having been established, the Single Judge entered

into the merits of the dispute. In this respect, the Single Judge started by acknowledging all the above-mentioned facts as well as the arguments and the documentation on file. However, the Single Judge 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.

1. Main legal discussion and considerations

19. The foregoing having been established, the Single Judge moved to the substance of the matter, and took note of the fact that the parties strongly dispute the payment of certain financial obligations by the Respondent as per the contract, namely the salaries for the months of February to June 2023.

20. In this context, the Single Judge acknowledged that his task was to determine, based on the pg. 5

REF. FPSD-10754 evidence presented by the parties, whether the claimed amounts had in fact remained unpaid by the Respondent and, if so, whether the latter had a valid justification for not having complied with its financial obligations.

21. The Single Judge first noted that in the case at hand the Respondent bore the burden of proving that it indeed complied with the financial terms of the contract concluded between the parties.

22. Nonetheless, the Single Judge noted that the evidence provided by the Respondent, namely multiple receipts for payments without any further itemisation or explanation does not prove the payment of the amounts claimed as outstanding by the Claimant. Furthermore, no reasonable justification was presented by the Respondent for not having complied with the terms of the contract. In particular, regarding the payment made in TRY, the Respondent has not presented any reasonable justification according to which payment in such currency were made and moreover, why ought to set-off contractual payments agreed in USD.

23. In view of the foregoing and bearing in mind the basic legal principle of pacta sunt servanda, which in essence means that agreements must be respected by the parties in good faith, the Respondent is held liable to pay the Claimant the outstanding amounts deriving from the contract

concluded between the parties, namely EUR 187,500.

24. In addition, taking into consideration the Claimant’s request as well as the constant practice of the Chamber in this regard, the latter decided to award the Claimant interest at the rate of 5% p.a. on the outstanding amounts as from the respective due date until the date of effective payment. ii. Art. 12bis

25. 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.

26. 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.

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

28. 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 second offense by the club within the last two years, the Single Judge decided to impose a reprimand on the club in accordance with art. 12bis par. 4 lit. b) of the Regulations.

29. 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. pg. 6

REF. FPSD-10754 iii. Compliance with monetary decisions

30. 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.

31. 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.

32. 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.

33. 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.

34. 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

35. 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.

36. 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.

37. Lastly, the Single Judge concluded its deliberations by rejecting any other requests for relief made by any of the parties. pg. 7

REF. FPSD-10754

IV. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber

1. The claim of the Claimant, Pedro Miguel De Almeida Lopes Pereira, is accepted.

2. The Respondent, Alanyaspor, must pay to the Claimant the following amount(s): - EUR 187,500 as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as follows: On EUR 18,750 from 1 February 2023 until the date of effective payment; On EUR 37,500 from 1 April 2023 until the date of effective payment; On EUR 18,750 from 1 April 2023 until the date of effective payment; On EUR 37,500 from 1 May 2023 until the date of effective payment; On EUR 37,500 from 1 June 2023 until the date of effective payment; On EUR 37,500 from 1 July 2023 until the date of effective payment.

3. Any further claims of the Claimant are rejected.

4. A reprimand is imposed on the Respondent (cf. art. 12bis of the Regulations for the Status and

Transfer of Players).

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. 8

REF. FPSD-10754

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. 9