热门搜索：

Georgiadis

文化传媒2023-10-25FIFA乐***

AI智能总结

The Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) passed a decision on October 25, 2023 regarding an employment-related dispute between Greek player Georgios Georgiadis and Turkish club Elazigspor. The case began in 2019 when the parties signed an employment contract that was valid until May 2020. In 2020, the DRC awarded the player EUR 60,000 in outstanding remuneration and EUR 130,000 in compensation for breach of contract. In 2022, the parties reached a settlement agreement, in which the club agreed to pay the player EUR 25,000 upon signature and EUR 165,000 until January 30, 2023. The settlement agreement also included a penalty clause stating that the EUR 25,000 payment would not be counted towards the total amount owed if the remaining balance was not paid by January 30, 2023.

Decisionofthe DisputeResolutionChamber passedon25October2023 regardinganemployment-relateddisputeconcerningtheplayerGeorgiosGeorgiadis BY: JorgeGutierrez(CostaRica),SingleJudgeoftheDRC CLAIMANT: GeorgiosGeorgiadis,Greece RepresentedbyParaskevasAtlamazoglou RESPONDENT: Elazigspor,Türkiye RepresentedbyErcanSevdimbaş I.Factsofthecase 1.On31January2019,theGreekplayer,GeorgiosGeorgiadis(hereinafter:Claimantorplayer)andtheTurkishclub,Elazigspor(hereinafter:cluborRespondent)concludedanemploymentcontract(hereinafter:contract)validasfrom31January2019until31May2020. 2.On21February2020,theDRCdecidedadisputebetweenthepartiesandawardedtheplayerEUR60,000(plusinterest)asoutstandingremunerationandEUR130,000(plusinterest)ascompensationforbreachofcontract(note:decisionno19-01755/driisonfile). 3.On14January2022,thepartiesconcludedasettlementagreement(hereinafter:settlementagreement),accordingtowhichtheRespondentundertooktopaytheClaimantthefollowingamounts: -EUR25,000uponsignatureofthesettlementagreement -EUR165,000until30January2023. 4.Furthermore,thesettlementagreementestablishedinitsart.2: “Penaltyclause:Theabove-mentionedpaymentofEUR25,000willnotbecalculatedinthetotalamountowedbytheclubtothefootballplayerincasetheremainingcreditbalance[190,000–25,000=165,000,plusinterestrate]ofthefootballplayerasdefinedinFIFA’sdecisionwillnotbepaidintotalbyElazigsportill30.01.2023”. 5.On21January2022,theRespondentremittedapaymentofEUR25,000,correspondingtothefirstinstalmentofthesettlementagreement. II.ProceedingsbeforeFIFA 6.On25August2023,theClaimantfiledtheclaimathandbeforeFIFA.Abriefsummaryofthepositionofthepartiesisdetailedincontinuation. a.PositionoftheClaimant 7.Inhisclaim,theClaimantrequestedpaymentofthefollowingmonies: -EUR165,000plusinterest; -EUR25,000plusinterest. 8.Furthermore,theplayerarguedthattheRespondentfailedtocomplywiththesettlementagreementandthatheisthereforeentitledtoclaimEUR25,000aspenalty. b.PositionoftheRespondent 9.Initsreply,theRespondentacknowledgedadebttotheplayerintheamountofEUR99,703.52,butheldthatitremittedthefollowingpayments,whilesubmittingcertainreceipts: -EUR25,000on21January2022; -EUR65,296.48on21January2022. 10.Furthermore,itarguedthatithasfinancialdifficultiesduetotheeconomicsituationinTurkey,theconsequencesofCOVID-19andduetotheearthquakeoccurred. c.ReactionoftheClaimanttotheallegedpayments 11.Inhisreactiontotheallegedpayments,theplayerpointedoutthathedidnotreceivethepaymentofEUR65,296.48on21January2022andthattheotherpaymentwasnotpartofhisclaim. III.ConsiderationsoftheDisputeResolutionChamber a.Competenceandapplicablelegalframework 12.Firstofall,theSingleJudge(hereinafteralsoreferredtoasSingleJudge)analysedwhetherhewascompetenttodealwiththecaseathand.Inthisrespect,hetooknotethatthepresentmatterwaspresentedtoFIFAon25August2023andsubmittedfordecisionon25October2023.Takingintoaccountthewordingofart.34oftheMarch2023editionoftheProceduralRulesGoverningtheFootballTribunal(hereinafter:theProceduralRules),theaforementionededitionoftheProceduralRulesisapplicabletothematterathand. 13.Subsequently,theSingleJudgereferredtoart.2par.1andart.24par.1lit.a)oftheProceduralRulesandobservedthatinaccordancewithart.23par.1incombinationwithart.22par.1lit.b)oftheRegulationsontheStatusandTransferofPlayers(May2023),heiscompetenttodealwiththematteratstake,whichconcernsanemployment-relateddisputewithaninternationaldimensionbetweenaGreekplayerandaTurkishclub. 14.Subsequently,theSingleJudgeanalysedwhichregulationsshouldbeapplicableastothesubstanceofthematter.Inthisrespect,heconfirmedthat,inaccordancewithart.26par.1and2oftheRegulationsontheStatusandTransferofPlayers(May2023edition),andconsideringthatthepresentclaimwaslodgedon25August2023,theMay2023editionofsaidregulations(hereinafter:theRegulations)isapplicabletothematterathandastothesubstance. b.Burdenofproof 15.TheSingleJudgerecalledthebasicprincipleofburdenofproof,asstipulatedinart.13par.5oftheProceduralRules,accordingtowhichapartyclaimingarightonthebasisofanallegedfactshallcarrytherespectiveburdenofproof.Likewise,theChamberstressedthewordingofart.13par.4oftheProceduralRules,pursuanttowhichitmayconsiderevidencenotfiledbytheparties,includingwithoutlimitationtheevidencegeneratedbyorwithintheTransferMatchingSystem(TMS). c.Meritsofthedispute 16.Hiscompetenceandtheapplicableregulationshavingbeenestablished,theSingleJudgeenteredintothemeritsofthedispute.Inthisrespect,theSingleJudgestartedbyacknowledgingalltheabove-mentionedfactsaswellastheargumentsandthedocumentationonfile.However,theSingleJudgeemphasisedthatinthefollowingconsiderationsitwillreferonlytothefacts,argumentsanddocumentaryevidence,whichitconsideredpertinentfortheassessmentofthematterathand. i.Mainlegaldiscussionandconsiderations 17.Theforegoinghavingbeenestablished,theSingleJudgemovedtothesubstanceofthematter,andtooknoteofthefactthatthepartiesdisputetheremittanceofcertainpaymentsfollowingasettlementagreement. 18.Inthiscontext,theSingleJudgeacknowledgedthathistaskwastodecideiftheplayerisentitledtopaymentsresu

点击免费查看完整报告