Avlonitis

Decisionofthe DisputeResolutionChamber passedon1November2023 regardinganemployment-relateddisputeconcerningtheplayerAnastasiosAvlonitis BY: AngelaCOLLINS(Australia),SingleJudgeoftheDRC CLAIMANT: AnastasiosAvlonitis,Greece RepresentedbyChrissaSevastopoulou RESPONDENT: ApollonLimassol,Cyprus RepresentedbyAlkisPapantoniou I.Factsofthecase 1.On24January2022,theGreekplayer,AnastasiosAvlonitis(hereinafter:Claimantorplayer)andtheCypriotclub,APOLLONLIMASSOL(hereinafter:cluborRespondent)concludedanemploymentcontract(hereinafter:contract)validasfrom24January2022until30June2023. 2.On31August2022,thepartiesconcludedaterminationagreement,accordingtowhichtheclubundertooktopaytheplayertheamountofEUR98,750,asfollows: -EUR10,000on30September2022; -EUR10,000on31October2022; -EUR10,000on30November2022; -EUR10,000on31December2022; -EUR10,000on31January2023; -EUR10,000on28February2023; -EUR10,000on31March2023; -EUR10,000on30April2023; -EUR10,000on31May2023; -EUR8,750on30June2023. 3.On27April2023,theClaimantputtheRespondentindefaultandrequestedpaymentofEUR60,358plusinterest,correspondingtooutstandinginstalmentsresultingfromtheterminationagreement,settingatimelimitof8days. 4.On11May2023,theclubrepliedtotheplayerproposing“repaymentoftheamountduein3equalinstalments,fromJunetoAugust”. 5.On30May2023,thepartiesenteredintoasettlementagreement,accordingtowhichtheclubundertooktopaytheplayertheamountofEUR60,358,asfollows: -EUR10,358on2June2023; -EUR10,000on20June2023; -EUR20,000on15July2023; -EUR20,000on15August2023. 6.Art.2ofthesettlementagreementestablishes:“Iftheclubfallstopayanyoftheagreedaboveinstalmentsinfullorinpart,andprovidedtheplayerhaspreviouslysenttotheclubviaemailanoticegivingtheclubseven(7)daystocomplywithitsobligationsunderthepresentagreementandtheclubdidnotcomply,thenthewholeremainingamountofthedebtwillbecomeimmediatelyoutstandingamountofthedebt,anamountoftwelvethousandeuro(EUR12,000)asanagreedpenaltyforthebreachoftheclub’scontractualobligationsprovidedinthepresentagreement.” 7.On4September2023,theClaimantputtheRespondentindefaultandrequestedpaymentofEUR20,000,correspondingtothelastinstalmentofthesettlementagreement. II.ProceedingsbeforeFIFA 8.On21September2023,theClaimantfiledtheclaimathandbeforeFIFA.Abriefsummaryofthepositionofthepartiesisdetailedincontinuation. a.PositionoftheClaimant 9.Inhisclaim,theClaimantrequestedpaymentofthefollowingmonies: -EUR20,000,correspondingtothelastinstalmentofthesettlementagreement,plus5%interestp.a.asof15August2023; -EUR12,000aspenaltybasedonart.2ofthesettlementagreement,plus5% interestp.a.asof18September2023. 10.Inthisframework,theplayerarguedthatthelastinstalmentofthesettlementagreementremainedunpaidandthepenaltyagreeduponwastriggered. b.PositionoftheRespondent 11.Initsreply,theoutstandingdebtofEUR20,000wasacknowledged. 12.However,theclubarguedthatthepenaltyofEUR12,000isdisproportionateandshallbedisregarded. III.ConsiderationsoftheDisputeResolutionChamber a.Competenceandapplicablelegalframework 13.Firstofall,theSingleJudge(hereinafteralsoreferredtoasSingleJudge)analysedwhethershewascompetenttodealwiththecaseathand.Inthisrespect,shetooknotethatthepresentmatterwaspresentedtoFIFAon21September2023andsubmittedfordecisionon1November2023.Takingintoaccountthewordingofart.34oftheMarch2023editionoftheProceduralRulesGoverningtheFootballTribunal(hereinafter:theProceduralRules),theaforementionededitionoftheProceduralRulesisapplicabletothematterathand. 14.Subsequently,theSingleJudgereferredtoart.2par.1andart.24par.1lit.a)oftheProceduralRulesandobservedthatinaccordancewithart.23par.1incombinationwithart.22par.1lit.b)oftheRegulationsontheStatusandTransferofPlayers(May2023),sheiscompetenttodealwiththematteratstake,whichconcernsanemployment-relateddisputewithaninternationaldimensionbetweenaplayerandaclub. 15.Subsequently,theSingleJudgeanalysedwhichregulationsshouldbeapplicableastothesubstanceofthematter.Inthisrespect,sheconfirmedthat,inaccordancewithart.26par.1and2oftheRegulationsontheStatusandTransferofPlayers(May2023edition),andconsideringthatthepresentclaimwaslodgedon21September2023,theMarch2023editionofsaidregulations(hereinafter:theRegulations)isapplicabletothematterathandastothesubstance. b.Burdenofproof 16.TheSingleJudgerecalledthebasicprincipleofburdenofproof,asstipulatedinart.13par.5oftheProceduralRules,accordingtowhichapartyclaimingarightonthebasisofanallegedfactshallcarrytherespectiveburdenofproof.Likewise,theSingleJudgestressedthewordingofart.13par.4oftheProceduralRules,pursuanttowhichitmayconsiderevidencenotfiledbytheparties,includingwithoutlimitationtheevidencegeneratedbyorwithintheTransferMatchingSystem(TMS). c.Meritsofthedispute 17.Hercompetenceandtheapplicableregulationshavingbeenestablished,theSingleJudgeenteredintothemeritsofthedispute.Inthisrespect,theSingleJudgestartedbyacknowledgingalltheabove-mentionedfactsaswellastheargumentsandthedocumentationonfile.However,theSingleJudgeemphasisedthatinthefollowingconsiderationsitwillreferonlytothefacts,argumentsanddocumentaryeviden