According to the general legal principle of burden of proof any party claiming a right on the basis of an alleged fact must carry the burden of proof, proving that the alleged fact is as claimed. This is in line with Article 8 of the Swiss Civil Code. In CAS arbitration, any party wishing to prevail on a disputed issue must discharge its burden of proof.
Failure by a club to pay a player’s salary as agreed for an amount representing more than six months salaries means that the club has seriously neglected its financial obligations towards the player. Unless the club can discharge the burden of proof to demonstrate that the Parties had concluded a payment plan involving a deferment of the club’s payment obligation, the club must be held liable for the early termination due to its breach of contract, and the player is thus, subject to Article 17.1 of the FIFA RSTP.Facts/Procedure
On 16 July 2009, Manisaspor Club (the Club) and Jimmy Dixon (the Player) signed a first Employment Contract valid as from the date of signature until 31 May 2012. On 24 November 2010, the Parties signed an Amendment Contract, valid for the 2010-2011 and 2011-2012 seasons. Finally, on 24 November 2010, the Parties signed a second Employment Contract valid as from 1 June 2012 until 31 May 2013.
By letter of 22 March 2012, the Player stated that the Club was in default in payment of the total amount of EUR 110,000, which, according to the Player,...
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