Gacancin

Decisionofthe PlayersStatusChamber passedon5December2023 regardinganemployment-relateddisputeconcerningthecoachRodionGacancin BY: LuisKanonnikoff(Paraguay),SingleJudgeofthePSC CLAIMANT: RodionGacancin,Croatia RepresentedbyIvanSmokrović RESPONDENT: HajerClub,SaudiArabia RepresentedbyGlobalSportConsulting I.Factsofthecase 1.On18June2023,theCroatiancoach,RodionGacancin(hereinafter:Claimantorcoach)andtheSaudiclub,Hajer(hereinafter:cluborRespondent)concludedanemploymentcontract(hereinafter:contract)validasfrom1July2023until31May2024. 2.TheClaimantwasemployedasheadcoach. 3.Accordingtothecontract,theRespondentundertooktopaytheClaimantthefollowingmonies: -USD10,000as“contractproviderpayment”on1October2023; -USD12,000asmonthlysalary,payableattheendofeachmonth. 4.Art.4lit.Bofthecontractstates:“Thefirstpartyprovidesthesecondpartyandhiswifewith (1)airlinetickets(economyclass)atthebeginningandendofthecontractbetweenCroatiatoSaudiArabiaandback(roundtrip).” 5.Art.7ofthecontractreadsasfollows:“Ifeitherpartyterminatesthecontractwithjustcauseorwithoutjustcauseanagreedcompensationof24000USDmustbepaidtotheinjuryparty.Thisliquidateddamageclauseisfairandproportionateandagreedbetweenbothpartiesafterlongnegotiation.” 6.On29September2023,theclubterminatedthecontractwiththecoachsince“theresultswerenotasexpected”.Theclubpointedoutthattheoutstandingremunerationandcompensationinaccordancewithart.7ofthecontractwillberemittedtothecoach“assoonaspossible”. 7.Thecoachconfirmedthatheremainedunemployeduntiltoday. II.ProceedingsbeforeFIFA 8.On13October2023,theClaimantfiledtheclaimathandbeforeFIFA.Abriefsummaryofthepositionofthepartiesisdetailedincontinuation. a.PositionoftheClaimant 9.Inhisclaim,theClaimantrequestedthefollowingmonies: -USD24,000asoutstandingremuneration(AugustandSeptember2023) -USD10,000correspondingtothe“contractproviderpayment”dueon1October2023; -USD96,000ascompensation(salariesOctober2023andMay2024,8xUSD12,000); -USD3,000as“returnairtickets”Croatia-SaudiArabia; -USD72,000asadditionalcompensation. TheClaimantrequestedpaymentof5%interestp.a.asoftheduedates. 10.Inhisclaim,thecoacharguedthattheclubterminatedthecontractwithoutjustcause. 11.AccordingtotheClaimantthesportingresults“cannotconstituteajustcausefordismissal”. 12.Onaccountoftheabove,thecoachheldthatheisentitledtohisoutstandingduesandcompensationforbreachofcontract,correspondingtotheresidualvalueofthecontract. 13.Regardingart.7ofthecontract,theClaimantarguedthatitissolelyinfavouroftheclubanddisproportionateandshallbedeclarednullandvoid. 14.ThecoachsubmittedhisairticketfromSaudiArabiatoCroatiaon4October2023intheamountofSAR2,570(approx.USD700). b.PositionoftheRespondent 15.Initsreply,theRespondentrequestedto“considertheterminationmadebymutualagreement”andtoordertheclubtopaytheoutstandingremunerationintheamountofUSD24,000aswellascompensationintheamountofUSD24,000(inaccordancewithart.7ofthecontract). 16.Theclubarguedthatthepartiesnegotiatedaterminationagreement,whichwasverballyagreed,However,subsequentlythecoachrefusedtosigntheagreement. 17.Onaccountoftheabove,theclubpointedoutthatithadnootherchoicethantoterminatethecontractunilaterallyduetothesportingresults. 18.Theclubacknowledgedthatsportingresultsdonotconstituteajustcausetoterminatethecontract,however,itarguedthatart.7ofthecontractisapplicable. 19.Accordingtotheclub,saidclauseisclearandbalanced,givingbothpartiesthesamerights. III.ConsiderationsofthePlayersStatusChamber a.Competenceandapplicablelegalframework 20.Firstofall,theSingleJudgeofthePlayers’StatusChamber(hereinafteralsoreferredtoasSingleJudge)analysedwhetherhewascompetenttodealwiththecaseathand.Inthisrespect,hetooknotethatthepresentmatterwaspresentedtoFIFAon13October2023andsubmittedfordecisionon5December2023.Takingintoaccountthewordingofart.34oftheMarch2023editionoftheProceduralRulesGoverningtheFootballTribunal(hereinafter:theProceduralRules),theaforementionededitionoftheProceduralRulesisapplicabletothematterathand. 21.Subsequently,theSingleJudgereferredtoart.2par.1andart.24par.2oftheProceduralRulesandobservedthatinaccordancewithart.23par.2incombinationwithart.22par.1lit.f)oftheRegulationsontheStatusandTransferofPlayers(May2023),heiscompetenttodealwiththematteratstake,whichconcernsanemployment-relateddisputebetweenaclubandacoachofaninternationaldimension. 22.Subsequently,theSingleJudgeanalysedwhichregulationsshouldbeapplicableastothesubstanceofthematter.Inthisrespect,heconfirmedthat,inaccordancewithart.26par. 1and2oftheRegulationsontheStatusandTransferofPlayers(May2023),andconsideringthatthepresentclaimwaslodgedon13October2023,theMay2023editionofsaidregulations(hereinafter:theRegulations)isapplicabletothematterathandastothesubstance. b.Burdenofproof 23.TheSingleJudgerecalledthebasicprincipleofburdenofproof,asstipulatedinart.13par.5oftheProceduralRules,accordingtowhichapartyclaimingarightonthebasisofanallegedfactshallcarrytherespectiveburdenofproof.Likewise,theSingleJudgestressedthewordingofart.13par.4oftheProceduralRules,pursuanttowhichitmayconsiderev