Camara Sobral “Cacau”

Decisionofthe Players’StatusChamber passedon10October2023 regardinganemployment-relateddisputeconcerningthecoachRicardoCamaraSobral“Cacau” BY: ThulaganyoGAOSHUBELWE(SouthAfrica) CLAIMANT: ASDNapoliFutsal,Italy RESPONDENT: RicardoCamaraSobralCacau,Brazil I.Factsofthecase 1.On30March2023,ASDNapoliFutsal(hereinafter:“theClub”or“theClaimant”)andRicardoCamaraSobral“Cacau”(hereinafter:theRespondentor“Cacau”)concludeda“financialagreement”forthepositionof“technicalcoordinator”validasfromthedateofsignatureuntil27June2023. 2.Accordingly,MrRicardoCámaraSobralwasentitledtoa“feeof10,000”(€)tobepaidinthreemonthlyinstalmentsofEUR3,333. 3.Inaddition,thecontractstipulatedthat“Teamprizeswillbeidentifiedforwinningthechampionship”. 4.Furthermore,thecontractstatedthefollowing: “TheTechnicalCoordinatorisrequiredtomaintainprofessionalbehaviorwithintheStructuresoftheASDNapoliFutsalCompanyandtorespectthetimesestablishedbytheCompanyforTrainingandCompetitions.Otherbehavioralspecificationswillbeincludedinthe"InternalRegulations"document.TrainingandcompetitionsessionswillbeheldattheCercolaSportsCenterlocatedinViaMatildeSeraosncCercola(Naples).” 5.TheIraqiFootballAssociationand“Cacau”concludedanemploymentcontractas“coachfortheIraqinationalteamforfive-a-sidefootball(FUTSAL)valid“fortwoyears”,bymeansofwhichthelatterwasentitledtoUSD10,500permonth. 6.TheIraqiFootballassociationstatedthattheaforementionedcontractisvalidasfrom20May2023until20May2025. II.ProceedingsbeforeFIFA 7.On6July2023,ASDNapoliFutsallodgedaclaimbeforeagainst“Cacau”andtheIraqiFootballAssociationbeforetheFIFAFootballTribunalforbreachofcontractwithoutjustcauseandrequestedbothpartiestojointlyandseverallycompensatethisbreachwithanamount“notlowerthan”EUR100,000,aswellastheimpositionofdisciplinarysanctionsandthepaymentofproceduralcostsandlegalfees. 8.MrRicardoCamaraSobral“Cacau”providedhisreplyonlyaftertheexpirationofthedeadlinegrantedbyFIFA: 9.TheIraqiFAwasinvitedtoprovideitscomments,butfailedtodoso. III.ConsiderationsofthePlayers’StatusChamber a.Competenceandapplicablelegalframework 1.Firstofall,theSingleJudgeofthePlayers’StatusChamber(hereinafteralsoreferredtoastheJudgeorSingleJudge)analysedwhetheritwascompetenttodealwiththecaseathand.Inthisrespect,ittooknotethatthepresentmatterwaspresentedtoFIFAon6July2023andsubmittedfordecisionon10October2023.Takingintoaccountthewordingofart.34oftheOctober2022editionoftheProceduralRulesGoverningtheFootballTribunal(hereinafter:theProceduralRules),theaforementionededitionoftheProceduralRulesisapplicabletothematterathand. 2.Subsequently,theSingleJudgereferredtoart.2par.1oftheProceduralRulesandobservedthatinaccordancewithart.23par.1incombinationwithart.22lit.b)oftheRegulationsontheStatusandTransferofPlayers(October2022edition),theSingleJudgeiscompetenttodealwiththematteratstake,whichconcernsanemployment-relateddisputewithaninternationaldimensionbetweenanItalianclubandaBrazilcoach. 3.Onthisnote,theSingleJudgedeemednecessarytoclarifywhethertheRespondentisacoachinthesenseoftheDefinitionssectionoftheRegulationsontheStatusandTransferofPlayers.Inparticular,theJudgerecalledthat,aspersaidtext,acoachisdefinedasfollows: “28.Coach:anindividualemployedinafootball-specificoccupationbyaprofessionalcluborassociationwhose: iemploymentdutiesconsistofoneormoreofthefollowing:trainingandcoachingplayers,electingplayersformatchesandcompetitions, iimakingtacticalchoicesduringmatchesandcompetitions;and/oremploymentrequirestheholdingofacoachinglicenceinaccordancewithadomesticorcontinentallicensingregulation. 4.Inthisrespect,theJudgenotedthatthecontractconcludedbetweentheClaimantandtheRespondentdescribesthefunctionsofthelatteras“technicalcoordinator”, 5.Intheviewofthecoach,thefactthattheRespondentsubsequentlyconcludedacontractwiththeIraqiFootballAssociationasitsnationalcoachforfutsalindicatedthathewasqualifiedasacoach.Insupportofthisconviction,theJudgealsoobservedthatthepressarticlesattachedbytheClaimantrefertohimasacoach. 6.Insum,althoughtheRespondent’stitleas"technicalcoordinator"doesnotexplicitlystate"coach,"hiscontractualduties,thecoachingresponsibilitiesmentionedinthedefinitionas describedintheRegulations,altogetherwithhisnewcontractinIraqclearlyindicatethathewasworkingasacoach. 7.TheJudgealsoobservedthatasecondelementoftheclaimistheroleoftheIraqiFootballAssociation(IraqiFA).Indeed,theJudgenotedthattheClaimantnominatedtheIraqiFAasasecondrespondent.Withinthiscontext,theClaimantcomparedthesituationoftheIraqiFAtotheroleofaplayer’snewclubunderart.17par.2RegulationsontheStatusandTransferofPlayers,accordingtowhichifaprofessional(player)isrequiredtopaycompensation,theprofessional(player)andhisnewclubshallbejointlyandseverallyliableforitspayment.However,theSingleJudgeobservedthatthisprovisionisonlyapplicabletoplayersandnottocoaches,insofarthespecificelementspertainingtocoachesareregulatedinAnnexe2oftheRegulationsontheStatusandTransferofPlayers.TheChamberthusnotedthatisnoequivalentinAnnexe2tothisprovisioninrelationtocoaches.Hence,theJudgeconcludedthattheIraqi