ISDE - Written Submissions 25.04.2022

FIFA Written submissions
& Case studies

ISDE – 25 April 2022
Ignacio Triguero Gea

Senn, Ferrero, Asociados
www.sennferrero.com
© 2022 Senn, Ferrero, Asociados Sports & Entertainment,

S.L.P
FIFA: WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS
INSERTAR EN LA MASTER
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
Two scenarios:
• Pre-litigation: ELAZIGSPOR v. Víctor Javier Añino (“Vitolo”).
• Miscellaneous of relevant proceedings.
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
ELAZIGSPOR v. Víctor Javier Añino (“Vitolo”).
• Current Employment Agreement in force subscribed between the

Player and the Club on August 2013 and valid until June 2016.
• First payment on January 1, 2014.
• Last place in the Turkish Super League 2013/2014.
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
• On January 6, 2014 – The Club notifies the Player and you as the
lawyers of the player of an economical distress.
• The club suggests to have a meeting in order to solve the matter

positively.
• What to do?
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
• Refresh the Agreement.
• Answer to the e-mail accepting the meeting.
• In said communication, highlight the breach of the Agreement due to

the outstanding amount.
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
• The Club delays unjustifiably the meeting and continues without

paying the amounts.
• The Player is not called to play the next game.
• What to do?
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
The parties expressly declare that the delay by the Club in paying the
agreed salary in two (2) monthly installments shall entitle the Player to
unilaterally terminate this contract with just cause, subject to a duly
authenticated notice served on the Club giving it a period of fifteen (15)
days to become current in payment, with the right to receive as an
indemnity due to the breach by the Club the amounts established in
clause 3F of this Contract, with this situation being treated, as regards
its consequences, as the same as that of the unilateral termination
without just cause on the part of the Club.
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
• 48 hours of the grace period.
• The following days the parties cross each other different e-mails
regarding the possible meeting – VIP to continue highlighting the
breach of the Agreement.
• On January 14, 2014, the Club started its manoeuvres against the
Player in order to harass him. The Club prohibited the Player from
training with the First Team without any reason. Moreover and when
the Player requested explanations in writing the Club answered him
that he would receive said explanations the following day when he
trained with the Second Team
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
• Additional breach of the Agreement:
OBJECT: The Player agrees to serve the Club faithfully and diligently to
the best of his ability as football player on a full time basis during the
period herein stipulated, playing with the first squad of the Club.
• What to do?
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
• Send a notification describing the situation:
• Non-payment.
• Training with the Second Team.
• Requesting an explanation.
• If possible, prove with a Public Notary.
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
• You are training with the Second Team.
• No salary payment.
• Not being provided with any reasons nor with a training schedule.
• What to do?
• Stop training until you are paid and/or notified with your training
schedule?
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
• After the aforesaid communications in which the Club, not only

had not paid the outstanding amounts, but also had prohibited
the Player from training with the First Team, the Club sent a
communication in which a disciplinary proceeding had been
carried out against the Player “due to its misbehaviour” and
where he was officially separated from the First Team, without any
more privileges and obliged to train with the Second Team every
day on 10:00 am and 15:00 pm.
• What to do?
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
• Send a communication requesting an explanation of the alleged

misbehavior.
• Request why the Player has not been part of said disciplinary
proceeding.
• Request information of until when said sanction will last.
• Highlight the Clubs breaches of the Agreement.
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
• The following day, the Club requested the Player to return all his
official training equipment and clothes from the First Team.
• Send a communication to the Club highlighting this.
• Pictures // Videos.
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
• The Player has not been paid a single euro since he signed the
Agreement, this is, since August 29, 2013;
• Despite the many communications sent by this party requesting the

payment of the Players salary and bonuses, to the present date the
Club owes the Player the amount of TWO HUNDRED AND FIFTY
THOUSAND EUROS (€ 250,000.00) net of taxes plus the accrued
bonuses also in net terms as stipulated in the Agreement.
• The Player, without any reason, was dismissed by the Club from the
First Team and relegated to train with the Second Team. To the present
date, the Club has not provided with the reasons nor the
corresponding sanction of why the Player was relegated to the Second
Team and banned to train and play with the First Team;
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
• The Player has been obliged to train with the Second Team when
according to the Agreement he was contracted by the Club to play and
train for the First Team;
• Moreover, he has been obliged in several times just to travel with the
Second Team. To this extent, he was told by the Coach and by the
President that he would never play nor even sit on the bench;
• During the training sessions with the Second Team, the Player was
never notified correctly the time nor the place where he had to train,
and when he arrived to the Clubs premises in each training session,
the rest of the technical staff and the players from the Second Team
arrived at least one hour later or never appeared;
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
• The Player has never been provided with a scheduled of his training
sessions as requested in our many communications;
• The Player has not been allowed to use the pitches assigned to the
First Team, nor his locker, nor the room that had been assigned to him
at the Clubs premises, nor the rest of the clubs facilities including
meals;
• The Player has been forced to train with borrowed clothes from
members of the Second Team. Additionally, and as the Club continued
without providing him with suitable training equipment (more than a
week using the same clothes), he was forced to use his own training
equipment;
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
• The Club has made him train continues sessions alone, with no
technical support, at times and days where nor the First and Second
Team have ever trained. Moreover, the Player was obliged to do double
sessions alone and to extenuation that provoked him injuries; and,
• The Club has even taken out of its official webpage and from the
member’s squad of the First Team the Players photo.
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
• On February 8, 2014 the Player unilaterally terminates the Agreement.
• What would you request?
• What are the consequences // scenario?
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
• Terminating with a just cause reason the Agreement and granting the
Club a term of seven (7) days in order to fulfil what is stipulated in
clause 3.F of the Agreement, this is, the payment by the Club of the
penalty amount of ONE MILLION AND SEVEN HUNDRED THOUSAND
EUROS (1,700,000.00 €) net of taxes and plus the bonus accrued to the
date of termination.
• What to do now?
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
• Dispute Resolution Chamber of FIFA (FIFA Football Tribunal) is the

competent body.
• The Rules Governing the Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee

and the Dispute Resolution Chamber.
• No advance of costs.
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
9 Petitions and statements
Petitions shall be submitted in one of the four official FIFA languages via
the FIFA general secretariat. They shall contain the following particulars:
a) the name and address of the parties;
b) the name and address of any legal representatives, if applicable, and
the power of attorney;
c) the motion or claim;
d) a representation of the case, the grounds for the motion or claim and
details of the evidence;
e) documents of relevance to the dispute, such as contracts and previous
correspondence with respect to the case in the original version and, if
applicable, translated into one of the official FIFA languages (evidence);
f) the name and address of other natural and legal persons involved in
the case concerned (evidence);
g) the amount in dispute, insofar as it is a financial dispute;
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
h) proof of payment of the relevant advance of costs for any proceedings

before the Players’ Status Committee or the single judge, or for any
proceedings related to disputes concerning training compensation or the
solidarity mechanism (cf. art. 17);
i) the date and a valid signature.
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
• The body you file the claim.
• The Parties – Claimant and Respondent.
• Brief Considerations
• The table of contents for better reference of the DRC.
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I.- Preliminary ................................................................................................................... 4
II.- Background.................................................................................................................. 5
III.- Arguments that Justify the Claim ............................................................................... 50
III.1. Breach with a just cause ................................................................................. 50

III.2. Application of Clause 3.F) of the Agreement ................................................... 53
IV.- Jurisdiction and Applicable Law to the Merits ............................................................ 58
IV.1. Clause Ten of the Agreement ......................................................................... 58

IV.2. The application of Swiss Law .......................................................................... 59
IV.3. The application of FIFA Regulations ................................................................ 61
IV.4. Taxes ............................................................................................................. 62
IV.5. Interests ........................................................................................................ 64
V.- Conclusions ............................................................................................................... 67
VI.- List of Annexes ......................................................................................................... 68
VII.- Discovery of Evidence .............................................................................................. 70
VIII.- Petitions ................................................................................................................. 71

LA SEGUNDA MARCA
• Specific summary of the facts.
• Jurisprudence.
• Legal opinion.
• Tax matters.
• Petitum.
• Hearing.
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
15 Decisions without grounds

1. The Players’ Status Committee, the DRC, the single judge and the DRC
judge may decide not to communicate the grounds of a decision and
instead communicate only the findings of the decision. At the same time,
the parties shall be informed that they have ten days from receipt of the
findings of the decision to request, in writing, the grounds of the
decision, and that failure to do so will result in the decision becoming final
and binding and the parties being deemed to have waived their rights to
file an appeal.
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
What would happen if you appeal

within 10 days of receipt of the
findings of the Decision instead of
requesting the grounds of the
Decision?
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
CAS 2011/A/2563 CD Nacional v. FK Sutjeska de 30 de marzo

de 2012:“In the event that – instead of a request for issuance of the
grounds – an “appeal ” against an unreasoned decision would be
filed within ten days with CAS directly, the Panel, taking into due
consideration the statements made by FIFA at the occasion of the
hearing, submits that CAS would have to inform the parties that (a)
the “appeal ” seems to be premature, (b) the “appeal” would be
forwarded to FIFA which shall consider such “appeal ” as a
proper request to issue a reasoned decision and (c) upon
receipt of the reasoned decision the appellant would then have
a deadline of 21 days to decide whether he/it would file or not
an appeal against the (reasoned) decision of FIFA”.
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
What would happen if you appeal

within 21 days from receipt of the
findings of the Decision?
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
CAS 2011/A/2563 CD Nacional v. FK Sutjeska de 30 de marzo

de 2012: “Finally, even though the vast majority of the parties to
FIFA dispute resolution cases seem to well understand the meaning
of Article 15 of the FIFA Procedural Rules, FIFA may consider to
follow the example of the Swiss federal rule maker and indicate in
the said provision and/or at the end of its decisions that failing a
request for grounds within the applicable deadline, the FIFA
decision would become final and binding and the parties will
be deemed to have waived their rights to file an appeal with
CAS. Since such a provision does not contradict the FIFA Statutes,
an amendment of those is not necessary but may be taken
nevertheless into consideration by FIFA”.
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
• Rejects the Players claim.
• The Player has not fulfilled clause 3.A – Two months of delay
in payments + 30 days.
• Burden of the proof – humiliated, harassed and distressed”.
• Burden of the proof // Tax matters – Legal Opinion.
• Payment of Euros 250,000.00 – outstanding amounts.
• Termination – with just or unjust reason?
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
• The Award must be final and binding // Appeal to the Swiss
Federal Tribunal (violation of procedural guarantees art.
190 Swiss Private International Law Act –PILA-).
A) The CAS was constituted in an irregular way (i.e. if it

was not impartial).
B) The arbitration tribunal wrongfully accepted its

jurisdiction (i.e. there was no valid arbitration
agreement).
C) The arbitration tribunal decided on points which were

not submitted or disputed or disregarded points that
were the subject matter of the dispute.
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
D) The right to be heard was violated.
E) The Award is incompatible with public policy.
• Not revision “ex novo”.
• No suspension “per se” of the execution of the Award

– it must be expressly requested by the appellant.
• Thirty (30) days after receiving the original Award.
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
• Formal communication to the Club:
• Requesting the amounts (i.e.

principal, interests, costs).
• Specifying a bank account.
• Granting a term for payment.
• Highlighting that in case of non

fulfilment you will commence legal
actions before FIFA’s disciplinary
bodies.
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
• Convention on the Recognition and

Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (New
York, 1958) (the "New York Convention").
• FIFA – Disciplinary Committee.
• Any other way?
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
• Enforce in
Switzerland –
Swiss Judge.
• UEFA – Nyon.
• FIFA – Zurich.
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
FIFA
Disciplinary
Code
2011 edition
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
Articles 15 and 52 of the FIFA DISCO 2019)
1. Anyone who fails to pay another person (such as a player, a
coach or a club) or FIFA a sum of money in full or part, even
though instructed to do so by a body, a committee or an
instance of FIFA or a subsequent CAS appeal decision
(financial decision), or anyone who fails to comply with
another decision (nonfinancial decision) passed by a body, a
committee or an instance of FIFA, or by CAS (subsequent
appeal decision):
a) will be fined for failing to comply with a decision;

b) will be granted a final deadline of 30 days by the judicial
bodies of FIFA in which to pay the amount due or to comply
with the (non-financial) decision;
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
c) (only for clubs:) will be warned and notified that, in the case of
default or failure to comply with a decision within the period
stipulated, a transfer ban will be pronounced. A deduction of points or
relegation to a lower division may also be ordered in addition to a
transfer ban in the event of persistent failure, repeated offences or
serious infringements or if no full transfer could be imposed or served
for any reason;
d) (only for associations) will be warned and notified that, in the case
of default or failure to comply with a decision within the period
stipulated, further disciplinary measures will be imposed. An
expulsion from a FIFA competition may also be pronounced.
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
e) in the case of natural persons, a ban on any football-related activity for a
specific period may be imposed. Other disciplinary measures may also be
imposed.
2. With regard to financial decisions passed by a body, a committee or an

instance of FIFA, or CAS, disciplinary proceedings may only commence at
the request of the creditor or any other affected party, who will have the right
to be notified of the final outcome of the said disciplinary proceedings.
3. The sporting successor of a non-compliant party shall also be considered

a non-compliant party and thus subject to the obligations under this
provision. Criteria to assess whether an entity is to be considered as the
sporting successor of another entity are, among others, its headquarters,
name, legal form, team colours, players, shareholders or stakeholders or
ownership and the category of competition concerned.
→ CAS 2020 A 6745 Predrag Vujovicv. Andijon Futbol Sport PFK & FIFA
→ CAS 2020 A 6884 Soukeyna Ba Bengellounv. FIFA & PFC CSKA-Sofia
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
5. Any appeal against a decision passed in accordance with this
article shall be lodged with CAS directly.
6. Any financial or non-financial decision that has been

pronounced against a club by a court of arbitration within the
relevant association or National Dispute Resolution Chamber
(NDRC), both duly recognised by FIFA, shall be enforced by the
association of the deciding body that has pronounced the
decision in accordance with the principles established in this
article and in compliance with the applicable disciplinary
regulations.
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
7. Any financial or non-financial decision that has been
pronounced against a natural person by a court of
arbitration within the relevant association or National
Dispute Resolution Chamber (NDRC), both duly
recognised by FIFA, shall be enforced by the
association of the deciding body that has pronounced
the decision or by the natural person’s new
association if the natural person has in the meantime
registered (or otherwise signed a contract in the case
of a coach) with a club affiliated to another
association,
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
• EURO 1,200,000.00
• 12 Instalments.
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
See FIFA Circular 1628 of May 9th, 2018 (“FIFA Circular 1628”):
→ Conclude agreements only that are paid in full at the date of signature
or without signing any relevant document.
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
RELEVANT CASE LAW
CAS 2018/A/6061 FC Rubin Kazan v. Granada CF
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
RELEVANT CASE LAW
• Litigation: CAS 2018/A/6061 FC Rubin Kazan v. Granada CF
• Key facts: Club v. Club Dispute for the transfer of Rubén Rochina
→ Signature of a transfer agreement on 19 July 2016
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
RELEVANT CASE LAW
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
RELEVANT CASE LAW
→ On 31 January 2018 Rubin concluded a loan agreement with the

Spanish club Levante until 30 June 2018
→ On 1 July 2018, the Player and Rubin signed a termination

agreement (the initial agreement was running until 2020)
→ Claim filed by Granada before the FIFA PSC requesting EUR

2.000.000 in accordance with article 2.1 (b) of the Transfer
Agreement that was accepted.
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
RELEVANT CASE LAW
→ Appeal to CAS by Rubin Kazan and reasoning
Methods of interpretation of contractual clauses (CAS 2017/A/5172)

• Pure literal interpretation is prohibited, interpretation shall be made considering other elements: rest of
provisions, objectives of the parties, drafting history = asses meaning parties wanted to attribute.
• Art. 18 SCO: content of the agreement construed according to the true intentions of the parties, so parties
subjective will shall have priority over contrary declarations in the text.
• If subjective will of the parties cannot be ascertain → application of the principle of mutual trust, i.e. in
accordance with the rules of good faith and meaning the parties wanted to attributed to their declarations.
→ In dubio contra stipulatorem: subsidiary, applicable to contracts where the terms are ambiguous
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
RELEVANT CASE LAW
→ Appeal to CAS by Rubin Kazan dismissed & reasoning
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
RELEVANT CASE LAW
CAS 2020/A/6795 Gustavo Quinteros v. FEF & FIFA
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
RELEVANT CASE LAW
→ Factual background
• Employment agreement subscribed on 26 February 2015 (“Civil Service Agreement”)
a) Term: valid until the last game played bv Ecuador in the Russia Fifa World Cup 2018.
b) Monthly salary 60.000 USD + bonus for qualifying for the World Cup 1.000.000 USD
c) Penalty Clause:
d) Jurisdiction:
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
RELEVANT CASE LAW
• On 5 September 2017 the FEF lost a qualifying game for the FIFA WC 2018.
• On 12 September 2017 the FEF announced in a press conference that as of this moment, Mr.
Celico (Director of youth teams) would be in charge of the national team for the remaining 2
qualifying games and published the following statement:
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
RELEVANT CASE LAW
• On 13 September 2017 a representative from the FEF clarified that Mr. Quinteros did not dismissed
Mr. Quinteros (with a civil contract), but only appointed Mr. Celico as head coach.
• On 14 September 2017 Mr. Quinteros replied to the FEF and send a default notice requesting the
outstanding salaries + penalty clause in the amount of USD 500.000:
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
RELEVANT CASE LAW
• On 18 September 2017 the FEF replied the coach underlining:
• The FEF did not terminate the contract but merely appointed Mr. Celico as head coach.
• That he must fulfil his contract until the end and provide all the assistance to Mr. Celico.
• On the same day the Coach lodged a claim against the FEF before FIFA claiming for the
outstanding salaries (only ½ a month) as well as the penalty clause of USD 500.000.
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
RELEVANT CASE LAW
→ Decision issued by the FIFA PSC on 25 September 2019
“1. The claim of Mr. Gustavo Domingo Quinteros is not admissible”.
Reasoning:
a) Lack of competence of the FIFA PSC in view of Clause 8 of the Contract:
“Jurisdiction of the Civil Judges of the city of Guayaquil or in the event of agreement, jurisdiction
of the Arbitration Tribunal of the Commercial Court of Guayaquil”.
b) FIFA concluded that said jurisdiction clause is valid in view of the content of art. 22 of the FIFA
RSTP that must also allow coaches to submit disputes before the national labour courts.
c) The relationship between the coach and the FEF count with all requirements to be considered as a
valid employment relationship, and therefore Art. 22.1 of the RSTP is applicable to coaches.
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
RELEVANT CASE LAW
→ Appeal to CAS against the FIFA PSC Decision lodged by Mr.

Quinteros on 27 February 2020 – Key Points
A) Parties in the appeal procedure? Standing to sue and to be sued
→ Summon FIFA in the appeal procedure + FEF = Vertical dispute
B ) Request for relief before the CAS:
What to claim before the CAS?
- To annul the FIFA PSC Decision and to replace said decision by [***]
- In the alternative, to annul the FIFA PSC Decision, recognize the jurisdiction of the FIFA PSC and
refer the case back to FIFA for decision.
→ Art. R57 of the CAS Code: “The Panel has full power to review the facts and the law. It may issue a
new decision which replaces the decision challenged or annul the decision and refer the case back to
the previous instance”.
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
RELEVANT CASE LAW
C) Applicable law?
- Contract submitted to the jurisdiction of the civil court in Guayaquil but no clause referring to the
applicable law.
- Art. R58 of the CAS Code:
- Art. 57.2 of the FIFA Statutes:
→ FIFA Regulations
→ Swiss law to questions of interpretation of the FIFA Regulations
→ Subsidiarily, the law chosen by the parties for legal issues not addressed in the FIFA Regulations
(CAS 2019/A/6312 Ailton José Almeida v. Al Jazira Football Sports Company & FIFA)
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
➢ RELEVANT CASE LAW
D) Jurisdiction: Preliminary hearing in July 2020
- Clause 8 is not exclusive (two options, i. state courts and ii. arbitration).
- FIFA PSC was competent to decide on its own jurisdiction (kompetenz-kompetenz).
- From the analysis of the legal expert reports and their respective statements, irrespectively of the
name of the contract, (“Contrato de Prestación de servicios”), it is undeniable that the parties had a
labour relationship (and not a civil one).
- As a result, civil courts in Ecuador do not have the competence to decide on employment related
disputes and any civil court could have dismiss any potential claim or declare the nullity of the
process.
➢ The case law referred by the FEF is dated from 2000 and 2003;
➢ Ecuadorian Civil Code does not regulate the relationship between a club and a coach, but
there is a specific “Reglamento Ministerial” that address this employment relationship (“lex
specialis derogat generali”).
➢ All elements of a labour relationship: periodical Remuneration, dependency or subordination,
and the rending of licit services.
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
D) Jurisdiction: Preliminary hearing in July 2020
- As a result, clause 8 of the contract is not valid;
- Equally the referral to the Arbitration court of the Chamber of Commerce is not valid since it
required the agreement of both parties and the coach decided to sue the FEF in front of FIFA.
- Art. 22 c) of the FIFA RSTP is therefore applicable to guarantee the effective judicial protection of
the coach and in application of the principle pro operario to the case at hand where some doubts
arise concerning the validity of clause 8.
- The FIFA PSC shall be the natural forum for the FEF and in accordance with the FIFA Statutes.
- The FIFA PSC left the coach in a “jurisdiction loophole” which is not acceptable.
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
D) Substance of the matter: Hearing of September 2020
• As a general principle, the power of a club or federation does not allow the employee to unilaterally
change its main obligations and duties under the employment agreement.
• The replacement of the coach by Mr. Celico tantamount to a unilateral dismissal and the facts and
actions carried out by the FEF clearly reveal this way of action: CAS 2013/A/3091):
• This decision was not even notified to the coach but disclose to the press first.
• Never informed the coach about the new tasks and never requested the coach to attend the
headquarters of the FEF to resume the new role.
• Bad sporting results do not constitute just cause to terminate the contract.
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
• Consequences of the unilateral termination of the contract on 12 September 2017
• The penalty clause is valid in accordance with art. 362 and art. 163 of the SCO
• The panel decided to reduce the penalty considering the disproportionality between the penalty
and the interest of the creditor and the legitime interests of the creditor in view of:
→ The moment of the termination and duration of the contract (Participated in 16 out of 18
qualifying games with the FEF).
→ Possibility to qualify for the FIFA WC very small and the contract would have expired on 11
October 2017.
→ Disproportion between the penalty and the real damage.
→ The coach quickly found another opportunity in Saudi Arabia.
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
• Final compensation: USD 366.000 + 5% interests.
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
RELEVANT CASE LAW
Group Case
LA SEGUNDA MARCA
Thank you!
Ignacio Triguero Gea
Senn, Ferrero, Asociados Sports & Entertainment
Plaza de la Lealtad nº 3, 5ª planta
Madrid 28014
Tel. 91 701 00 10
Ignacio.triguero@sennferrero.com
© 2022 Senn, Ferrero, Asociados Sports & Entertainment,

S.L.P

ISDE - Written Submissions 25.04.2022

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ISDE - Written Submissions 25.04.2022

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

FIFA Written submissions

& Case studies

Ignacio Triguero Gea

© 2022 Senn, Ferrero, Asociados Sports & Entertainment,

• Pre-litigation: ELAZIGSPOR v. Víctor Javier Añino (“Vitolo”).

• Miscellaneous of relevant proceedings.

ELAZIGSPOR v. Víctor Javier Añino (“Vitolo”).

• Current Employment Agreement in force subscribed between the

• First payment on January 1, 2014.

• Last place in the Turkish Super League 2013/2014.

• The club suggests to have a meeting in order to solve the matter

• Refresh the Agreement.

• Answer to the e-mail accepting the meeting.

• In said communication, highlight the breach of the Agreement due to

• The Club delays unjustifiably the meeting and continues without

• The Player is not called to play the next game.

• 48 hours of the grace period.

• Additional breach of the Agreement:

• Send a notification describing the situation:

• If possible, prove with a Public Notary.

• You are training with the Second Team.

• After the aforesaid communications in which the Club, not only

• Send a communication requesting an explanation of the alleged

• Request information of until when said sanction will last.

• Highlight the Clubs breaches of the Agreement.

• Send a communication to the Club highlighting this.

• Despite the many communications sent by this party requesting the

• On February 8, 2014 the Player unilaterally terminates the Agreement.

• What would you request?

• What are the consequences // scenario?

• Dispute Resolution Chamber of FIFA (FIFA Football Tribunal) is the

• The Rules Governing the Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee

h) proof of payment of the relevant advance of costs for any proceedings

• The body you file the claim.

• The Parties – Claimant and Respondent.

• The table of contents for better reference of the DRC.

I.- Preliminary ................................................................................................................... 4

III.- Arguments that Justify the Claim ............................................................................... 50

III.1. Breach with a just cause ................................................................................. 50

IV.- Jurisdiction and Applicable Law to the Merits ............................................................ 58

IV.1. Clause Ten of the Agreement ......................................................................... 58

V.- Conclusions ............................................................................................................... 67

VI.- List of Annexes ......................................................................................................... 68

VII.- Discovery of Evidence .............................................................................................. 70

VIII.- Petitions ................................................................................................................. 71

• Specific summary of the facts.

15 Decisions without grounds

What would happen if you appeal

CAS 2011/A/2563 CD Nacional v. FK Sutjeska de 30 de marzo

What would happen if you appeal

CAS 2011/A/2563 CD Nacional v. FK Sutjeska de 30 de marzo

• Rejects the Players claim.

• Burden of the proof – humiliated, harassed and distressed”.

• Burden of the proof // Tax matters – Legal Opinion.

• Payment of Euros 250,000.00 – outstanding amounts.

• Termination – with just or unjust reason?

A) The CAS was constituted in an irregular way (i.e. if it

B) The arbitration tribunal wrongfully accepted its

C) The arbitration tribunal decided on points which were

D) The right to be heard was violated.

E) The Award is incompatible with public policy.

• Not revision “ex novo”.

• No suspension “per se” of the execution of the Award