FIFA - Decisiones estatuto del jugador - Cannavaro 06062023

REF. FPSD-9730

Decision of the Players’ Status Chamber passed on 6 June 2023 regarding an employment-related dispute concerning the coach Fabio Cannavaro BY: Jesús Arroyo (Spain) Single Judge of the Players’ Status Chamber

CLAIMANT: Fabio Cannavaro, Italy Represented by Messrs Salvatore Civale and Claudio Minghetti

RESPONDENT:

Guangzhou FC, China PR Represented by Llinks Law Offices pg. 2

REF. FPSD-9730

I. Facts of the case

1. On 31 August 2021, the Italian coach Fabio Cannavaro (hereinafter: Claimant or coach) and Chinese club Guangzhou FC (hereinafter: club or Respondent) concluded settlement agreement (hereinafter: Settlement Agreement) by way of which the previously existing employment relationship was mutually terminated.

2. According to the Settlement Agreement, the Respondent undertook to pay the Claimant two instalments of EUR 750,000 net each, on the dates of 5 October 2021 and 5 November 2021 respectively.

3. On 11 January 2023, the parties signed a “set off agreement” (hereinafter: the Set-off Agreement) in accordance with which it was agreed that two payments of RMB 1,000,000 and RMB 134,883.89, which were made by the Respondent, would be taken into consideration for the purposes of the overall debt.

4. On 9 August 2022, the Claimant put the Respondent in default and requested payment of EUR 1,500,000 net, granting a formal deadline of 10 days to remedy the alleged contractual breach.

5. On 25 August 2022, the Respondent made a payment of RMB 1,000,000.

6. On 4 January 2023, the Respondent made a further payment of RMB 134,883.89.

7. On 23 February 2022, the Claimant once again put the Respondent in default for the abovementioned amount, requesting payment within 10 days.

II. Proceedings before FIFA

8. On 23 March 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

9. According to the Claimant, the Respondent failed to comply with the requirement of paying EUR 1,500,000 net under the Settlement Agreement, despite having been put in default and granted a formal deadline to remedy such alleged breach.

10. The Claimant requested the above amount, as well as interest as from the respective due dates of the missed instalments. pg. 3

REF. FPSD-9730

b. Position of the Respondent

11. In its reply, the Respondent outlined that it made two payments of RMB 1,000,000 and RMB 134,883.89 respectively.

12. The Respondent argued that these amounts should be taken into consideration and deducted from the overall debt. Therefore, the Respondent acknowledged a debt of EUR 1,335,359.80 net.

13. Lastly, the Respondent outlined briefly that it could not make the due payments on account of financial problems.

c. Comments of the Claimant

14. The Claimant confirmed the two payments which were made by the Respondent, maintained his position, however, to the rest of the claim. pg. 4

REF. FPSD-9730

III. Considerations of the Players Status Chamber

a. Competence and applicable legal framework

15. First of all, the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Chamber (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 23 March 2023 and submitted for decision on 6 June 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.

16. Subsequently, the Single Judge referred to art. 2 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules and observed that in accordance with art. 23 par. 2 in combination with art. 22 lit. c) of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (March 2023 edition), he is competent to deal with the matter at stake, which concerns an employment-related dispute with an international dimension between a coach from Italy and a club from China PR.

17. 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 (March 2023 edition), and considering that the present claim was lodged on 23 March 2023, the October 2022 edition of said regulations (hereinafter: the Regulations) is applicable to the matter at hand as to the substance.

b. Burden of proof

18. 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 it 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

19. His 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,

the Single Judge emphasised that in the following considerations he will refer only to the facts, arguments and documentary evidence, which it considered pertinent for the assessment of the matter at hand. pg. 5

REF. FPSD-9730

1. Main legal discussion and considerations

20. The foregoing having been established, the Single Judge moved to the substance of the matter, and took note of the fact that the parties disputed the payment of amounts arising out of the Settlement Agreement, from the Respondent to the Claimant.

21. In this context, the Single Judge acknowledged that his task was to determine whether the amount claimed as outstanding had, indeed, not been remitted, and subsequently whether the Respondent had a valid justification for defaulting on such payments.

22. The Single Judge noted in this respect that the parties were in agreement, particularly following the proofs of payment submitted by the Respondent of RMB 1,000,000 and RMB 134,883.89, that the total amount outstanding was EUR 1,335,359.80 net.

23. With the non-payment having been established, the Single Judge moved on to consider whether or not the Respondent had provided a valid justification for defaulting on the above amounts.

24. In this respect, the Single Judge recalled the line of argument that the Respondent had been suffering financial difficulties due to circumstances that were out of its control.

25. However, at the same time, the Single Judge noted that the Respondent provided no evidence to corroborate such assertion, as well as to support the line of argument that it was unable to comply with the financial terms of the Contract. In this respect, the Single Judge emphasised that the Respondent bore the burden of proving the veracity of the facts that it attempts to rely on, in accordance with art. 13 par. 5 of the Procedural Rules.

26. Thus, and in conclusion, the Single Judge established that the Respondent failed to meet its burden of proving that it had a valid justification for defaulting on the amounts claimed

under the Settlement Agreement.

27. Therefore, and in accordance with the general legal principle of pacta sunt servanda, the Single Judge decided that the Respondent is liable to pay the Claimant the amounts which were established as outstanding, namely EUR 1,335,359.80 net.

28. Furthermore, taking note of the Claimant’s request, as well as the constant practice of the Single Judge in this regard, the latter decided to award the Claimant interest on the above amounts, in the following manner: - on the amount of EUR 585,359.80 net, as from 6 October 2021 until the date of effective payment; - on the amount of EUR 750,000 net, as from 6 November 2021 until the date of effective payment. pg. 6

REF. FPSD-9730 ii. Application of art. 7, Annexe 2 of the Regulations

29. In continuation, the Single Judge referred to art. 7 par. 2 of Annexe 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. 7 par. 4 of Annexe 2 of the Regulations.

30. To this end, the Single Judge confirmed that the coach 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.

31. 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. 7 of Annexe 2 of the Regulations was met in the case at hand.

32. The Single Judge further established that by virtue of art. 7 par. 4 of Annexe 2 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 2nd offence by the club within the last two years (1st offence: FPSD-3658, notified on 28 October 2021), the Single Judge decided to impose a reprimand on the club in accordance with art. 7 par. 4 lit. b) of Annexe 2 of the Regulations.

33. 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. 7 par. 6 of Annexe 2 of the Regulations. iii. Compliance with monetary decisions

34. Finally, taking into account the applicable Regulations, the Single Judge referred to art. 8 par. 1 and 2 of Annexe 2 of the Regulations, which stipulate that, with his 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.

35. 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.

36. 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 pg. 7

REF. FPSD-9730 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. 8 par. 2, 4, and 7 of Annexe 2 of the Regulations.

37. 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.

38. 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. 8 par. 8 of Annexe 2 of the Regulations.

d. Costs

39. 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.

40. 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.

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

REF. FPSD-9730

IV. Decision of the Players’ Status Chamber

1. The claim of the Claimant, Fabio Cannavaro, is accepted.

2. The Respondent, Guangzhou FC, must pay to the Claimant EUR 1,335,359.80 net as outstanding remuneration plus 5% interest p.a. as follows: - on the amount of EUR 585,359.80 net as from 6 October 2021 until the date of effective payment; - on the amount of EUR 750,000 net as from 6 November 2021 until the date of effective payment.

3. Any further claims of the Claimant are rejected.

4. A reprimand shall be imposed on the Respondent (cf. art. 7 Annexe 2 RSTP).

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. 8 of Annexe 2 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. 8 par. 7 and 8 of Annexe 2 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-9730

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