For the purposes of mitigation under Article 17.1 ii) of the FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (Ed February), contractually guaranteed monetary housing and car allowances formed part of the player’s remuneration. They had to be deducted from the residual value of the terminated contract as mitigation. By contrast, alleged team bonuses could not be deducted absent proof that they had become due or had in fact been paid, and bad faith could not be inferred, on the facts of the case, merely from the structure of the player’s new contract.
Introduction
This case concerns the calculation of compensation following a player’s unilateral termination of contract with just cause due to overdue payables. CAS was asked to decide whether certain benefits granted under the player’s new employment contract formed part of the remuneration to be taken into account for mitigation purposes under Article 17.1 ii) of the FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (RSTP). It also had to determine whether alleged team bonuses unde the new contract should be deducted, whether the player had acted in bad faith when entering into that agreement and whether the FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) had correctly awarded additional compensation corresponding to three monthly salaries.
Why not join us?
Football Legal is an independent media publishing football law contents on a daily basis
dedicated to all football law practitioners (lawyers, clubs, federations,
intermediaries, football stakeholders, etc.).
Register today and stay tuned to the latest legal news.
Get started
Why not join us?
Football Legal is an independent media publishing football law contents on a daily basis dedicated to all football law practitioners (lawyers, clubs, federations, intermediaries, football stakeholders, etc.).
Register today and stay tuned to the latest legal news.
Get started
