Dal Toe Busanello

Decisionofthe DisputeResolutionChamber passedon22November2023 regardinganemployment-relateddisputeconcerningtheplayerGabrielDalToeBusanello BY: FransDEWEGER(TheNetherlands),Chairperson CalumBEATTIE(Scotland),member JohanVANGAALEN(SouthAfrica),member CLAIMANT: GabrielDalToeBusanello,Brazil RepresentedbyBrenoCostaRamosTannuri RESPONDENT: SCDnipro,Ukraine I.Factsofthecase 1.On14February2022,theBrazilianplayer,GabrielDalToeBusanello(hereinafter:Claimantorplayer)andtheUkrainianclub,SCDnipro(hereinafter:cluborRespondent)concludedafirstemploymentcontract(hereinafter:firstcontract)validasfrom14February2022until31December2022.TheplayerwasonloanfromtheBrazilianclub,Chapecoense. 2.Accordingtothefirstcontract,theRespondentundertooktopaytheClaimantamonthlysalaryofUkrainianHryvnia(UAH)120,000(approx.USD4,000). 3.Theadditionalagreementtothefirstcontractestablishes: 4.On24March2022,theplayer,theclubandChapecoenseagreedtoterminatesaidloaninlightoftheRussianinvasioninUkraine. 5.Accordingtotheplayer,on28June2022,theplayerandtheclubconcludedan“additionalagreement”,accordingtowhichthefirstemploymentcontractwouldbe“resumed”. 6.On6July2022,Chapecoense,theplayerandtheclubagreeduponanewloandealasof6July2022until31December2022. 7.On6July2022,theclubconcludedanewemploymentcontract(hereinafter:secondcontract)validasfrom6July2022until31December2022. 8.Accordingtothesecondcontract,theRespondentundertooktopaytheClaimantamonthlysalaryofUkrainianHryvnia(UAH)120,000(approx.USD4,000). 9.Onanunknowndate,thealleged“GeneralManager”,MrAndreyRusol,confirmedtotheplayerinaWhatsAppconversation: II.ProceedingsbeforeFIFA 10.On28September2023,theClaimantfiledtheclaimathandbeforeFIFA.Abriefsummaryofthepositionofthepartiesisdetailedincontinuation. a.PositionoftheClaimant 11.Inhisclaim,theClaimantrequestedpaymentofthefollowingmonies: -USD12,000asoutstandingsalaryofNovember2022,plus5%interestp.a.asof1December2022; -USD12,000asoutstandingsalaryofDecember2022,plus5%interestp.a.asof1January2023; -USD21,500asoutstandingbonuses,plus5%interestp.a.asof1February2023. 12.Inthiscontext,theplayerarguedthattheclubdidnotprovidetheplayerwiththesignedversionoftheadditionalagreementconcludedon28June2022. 13.Moreover,theplayerheldthatthestatisticsconfirmthattheplayerwascontractuallyboundtotheclubduringtheclaimedperiodandthattheGeneralManageroftheclubacknowledgedthedebtinaWhatsAppconversation. 14.TheplayerheldthattheclubonlyremittedUSD6,000forhissalariesinNovemberandDecember2022,andthatthereforeUSD24,000remainedoutstanding. 15.Further,hearguedthatheisentitledtobonusesfor5assists(5xUSD1,000),7victoriesinthestartingeleven(7xUSD1,500)and12matchesinthestartingeleven(12xUSD500). b.PositionoftheRespondent 16.TheRespondentfailedtoreplytotheclaim. III.ConsiderationsoftheDisputeResolutionChamber a.Competenceandapplicablelegalframework 17.Firstofall,theDisputeResolutionChamber(hereinafteralsoreferredtoasChamberorDRC)analysedwhetheritwascompetenttodealwiththecaseathand.Inthisrespect,ittooknotethatthepresentmatterwaspresentedtoFIFAon28September2023andsubmittedfordecisionon22November2023.Takingintoaccountthewordingofart.34oftheMarch2023editionoftheProceduralRulesGoverningtheFootballTribunal(hereinafter:theProceduralRules),theaforementionededitionoftheProceduralRulesisapplicabletothematterathand. 18.Subsequently,themembersoftheChamberreferredtoart.2par.1oftheProceduralRulesandobservedthatinaccordancewithart.23par.1incombinationwithart.22lit.b)oftheRegulationsontheStatusandTransferofPlayersMay2023edition),theDisputeResolutionChamberiscompetenttodealwiththematteratstake,whichconcernsanemployment-relateddisputewithaninternationaldimensionbetweenaplayerandaclub. 19.Subsequently,theChamberanalysedwhichregulationsshouldbeapplicableastothesubstanceofthematter.Inthisrespect,itconfirmedthat,inaccordancewithart.26par.1and2oftheRegulationsontheStatusandTransferofPlayers(May2023edition),andconsideringthatthepresentclaimwaslodgedon28September2023,theMay2023editionofsaidregulations(hereinafter:theRegulations)isapplicabletothematterathandastothesubstance. b.Burdenofproof 20.TheChamberrecalledthebasicprincipleofburdenofproof,asstipulatedinart.13par.5oftheProceduralRules,accordingtowhichapartyclaimingarightonthebasisofanallegedfactshallcarrytherespectiveburdenofproof.Likewise,theChamberstressedthewordingofart.13par.4oftheProceduralRules,pursuanttowhichitmayconsiderevidencenotfiledbytheparties,includingwithoutlimitationtheevidencegeneratedbyorwithintheTransferMatchingSystem(TMS). c.Meritsofthedispute 21.Itscompetenceandtheapplicableregulationshavingbeenestablished,theChamberenteredintothemeritsofthedispute.Inthisrespect,theChamberstartedbyacknowledgingalltheabove-mentionedfactsaswellastheargumentsandthedocumentationonfile.However,theChamberemphasisedthatinthefollowingconsiderationsitwillreferonlytothefacts,argumentsanddocumentaryevidence,whichitconsideredpertinentfortheassessmentofthematterathand. i.Mainlegaldiscussionandconsiderations 22.Theforegoinghavingbeenestablished,theChambermovedtothe