FC Vojvodina v. Ralph Serginho Greene

II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

3. Below is a summary of the main relevant facts and allegations based on the parties’ written submissions, pleadings and evidence adduced at the hearing. Additional facts and allegations may be set out, where relevant, in connection with the legal discussion that follows. Although

the Panel has considered all the facts, allegations, legal arguments and evidence submitted by the parties in the present proceedings, it refers in this Award only to the submissions and evidence it considers necessary to explain its reasoning.

4. On 3 July 2012, the Club and the Player entered into a professional player contract (hereinafter referred to as “the Contract”). The Contract provided:

“Article 1

This Contract is concluded for the period from 03.07.2012. to 03.07.2014. i.e. until the beginning of the summer transfer period 2014, registration period in the year in which the Contract expires.

Article 2

1. In consideration for the Player obligations towards the Club, the parties hereto have agreed upon the following monthly remuneration in the amount of minimal salary in Republic of Serbia published in Official Gazette of Republic of Serbia payable as follows on the bank account. Such remuneration shall not be modified unless by an annex to this Contract.

2. The parties hereby also set forth the following special compensation: upon signing annex of the contract from 03.07.2012. between the Club and the Player.

3. The parties hereby also set forth the following special bonuses: upon signing annex of the contract from 03.07.2012. between the Club and the Player.

4. The amounts of special bonuses referred to in Article 3 hereof are subject to changes and the parties hereto agree that the amount of such bonuses may be changed in accordance with Club regulations. Any change of the amount of a bonus shall be valid without execution of an annex to this Contract and the bonuses set forth by Club regulations shall apply.

5. Upon signing hereof, the Club shall provide to the Player the Club’s Bonus Rules and Disciplinary Regulations. The Player shall sign an acknowledgement of receipt of Club Rules and Regulations.

Article 3

1. The Player shall comply with the rules and regulations of FIFA, UEFA and the Football Association of Serbia, and in particular with the Statutes of the Football Association of Serbia, Regulations of the FA of Serbia for Player Registration, Status and Transfer, the Football Competition Rules of the FA of Serbia, as well as Club Statutes and other rules and regulations promulgated by the Club.

…

Article 10

1. The parties hereto agree that Player transfer shall be carried out under the following terms and conditions: regarding the agreement of the Club and the Player (the “Transfer”).

2. The parties hereto mutually agree that the Transfer shall be carried out in compliance with the provisions of the Regulations of the FA of Serbia for Player Registration, Status and Transfer and/or FIFA regulations governing international player transfer.

…

Article 12

1. By signing this Contract, the parties acknowledge that they have read and understood the Contract, and that they assume all rights and obligations, as well as all legal consequences arising out of this Contract.

2. Any matters not contemplated herein shall be governed by the laws of the Republic of Serbia, the rules and regulations of FIFA, UEFA, FA of Serbia and the Club”.

5. Further, the Club and the Player, in accordance with article 2 paragraph 2 of the Contract, entered into an annex to the Contract in relation to the remuneration to be paid to the Player (hereinafter referred to as “the Annex”). The main provisions of the Annex are as follows:

“….

2. The Club is obligated to pay to the Player 135.000 euros net per contracted year. With the Club TMS’ registration, the Club will pay the amount of 20.000 euros net on the bank account of the

….

4. For the second year of the Contract, 20.000 euros net will be paid to the Player until the end of August 2013 on his bank account.

5. For both contracted years the Player will have a salary in the amount of 115.000 euros net that will be devided in 12 equal monthly instalments.

6. The player will receive bonus that are prescribed by the Club rules.

…”.

6. On 30 January 2013, the Club entered into a loan agreement with AEK Larnaca FC (hereinafter referred to as “Larnaca”), Cyprus, for the loan of the Player for the period 30 January 2013 until 30 May 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “the Loan Agreement”).

7. On 14 June 2013, the Club informed the Player that he did not need to start training and that he could look for another club.

8. On 17 June 2013, the summer registration period of players commenced in Serbia.

9. On 17 July 2013, the Club again confirmed that the Player did not need to start with sports training and that he could look for another club. Further, that the Club would not request a transfer fee for the Player and that this “free transfer” was valid until 19 August 2013.

10. On 31 July 2013, the Player’s lawyer wrote to the Club stating that the Player had explained that he had not been paid his salary for the months of January, June and July 2013. Further, that the payments of July to December 2012 had not been completely paid and that the Player was owed EUR 10,925 net. The letter stated that the Player was entitled to his January, June and July 2013 salary (totalling EUR 28,749.66) and the EUR 10,925, thus a total of EUR 39,674.65. The letter stated that the payment should be made by 7 August 2013 and that if payment was not received then the Player would commence proceedings before FIFA.

11. On 16 August 2013, the Player’s lawyer wrote again to the Club requesting the payment of the outstanding amounts of EUR 39,674.66 net. The letter gave a deadline for payment of 23 August 2013.

12. On 28 August 2013, the Dutch Players’ Association, on the Player’s behalf, wrote to the Club informing the Club that the Player terminated the Contract with just cause (hereinafter referred to as the “Termination Letter”). The letter requested that the Club pay EUR 39,674.66 for the outstanding salaries and EUR 135,000 for the residual value of the Contract

13. On 8 January 2014, the Player signed a professional player contract with Larnaca for the period until 3 July 2014 with a monthly remuneration of EUR 2’500 consisting of a base salary in the amount of EUR 1,500 and EUR 1,000 for the Player’s image rights. In addition, the Player was entitled to an additional payment of EUR 500 for each match appearance of at least 20 minutes.

Proceedings before the Single Judge of the FIFA Players’ Status Committee

14. On 18 October 2013, the Player lodged a claim against the Club with FIFA requesting the payment of EUR 165,090.98 plus interest.

15. On 30 October 2013, FIFA wrote to the FAS providing FAS with a copy of the Player’s claim and requesting that the Club respond to the claim by 18 November 2013.

16. On 2 December 2013, FIFA wrote to the Club and the Player noting that the Club had not responded to the 30 October 2013 letter. FIFA confirmed that the investigation-phase had been concluded and requested the Player to provide any employment contract that he may have entered into with a new club.

17. On 2 December 2013, the FAS acknowledge receipt of the FIFA correspondence and stated that it had forwarded the letter to the Club. Further, the FAS confirmed the fax number for the Club.

18. On 3 December 2013, the Player’s representative confirmed that the Player had not signed an employment contract with a new club.

19. On 23 January 2014, FIFA requested the Player to confirm his contractual situation.

20. On 23 January 2014, the Club confirmed that on 13 January 2014 it had sent all documentation for registration of the Player with Larnaca. Further, that the Player was registered with Larnaca since 14 January 2014.

21. On 30 January 2014, the Player’s representative confirmed that the Player had entered into a contract with Larnaca for the initial period from 8 January 2014 until 31 May 2014.

22. On 31 January 2014, FIFA informed the Player and the Club that the matter was to proceed to the FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter referred to as “the DRC”) on 7 February 2014.

23. On 7 February 2014, the DRC held (hereinafter referred to as the “Appealed Decision”):

“1. The claim of the Claimant, Ralph Serginho Greene, is partially accepted.

2. The Respondent, FK Vojvodina, has to pay to the Claimant, within 30 days as from the date of notification of this decision, outstanding remuneration in the amount of EUR 39,674.31, plus 5% interest until the date of effective payment as follows:

a. 5% p.a. as of 1 January 2013 on the amount of EUR 10,924.65;

b. 5% p.a. as of 1 February 2013 on the amount of EUR 9,583.33;

c. 5% p.a. as of 1 July 2013 on the amount of EUR 9,583.33;

d. 5% p.a. as of 1 August 2013 on the amount of EUR 9,583.

3. The Respondent has to pay to the Claimant, within 30 days as from the date of notification of this decision, compensation for breach of contract in the amount of EUR 117,916.63 plus 5% interest p.a. on said amount as from 18 October 2013 until the date of effective payment.

4. In the event that the amounts due to the Claimant in accordance with the above-mentioned numbers 2. and 3. are not paid by the Respondent within the stated time limits, the present matter shall be submitted, upon request, to the FIFA Disciplinary Committee for consideration and a formal decision.

5. Any further claim lodged by the Claimant is rejected.

6. The Claimant is directed to inform the Respondent immediately and directly of the account number to which the remittances are to be made and to notify the Dispute Resolution Chamber of every payment received”.

24. On 24 February 2014, the Appealed Decision was notified to the parties. The Club requested the grounds of the Appealed Decision.

25. On 1 April 2014, FIFA provided the Club and the Player with the grounds of the Appealed Decision.

III. PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COURT OF ARBITRATION FOR SPORT

26. On 22 April 2014, the Club filed a Statement of Appeal with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (hereinafter referred to as the “CAS”) in accordance with Articles R47 and R48 of the Code of Sports-related Arbitration (hereinafter referred to as the “CAS Code”). In this submission the Club made the following requests for relief:

“The Appellant’s Appeal shall be accepted and the FIFA DRC Decision dated 7 February 2014 revised in Chapter III par. 3 so that:

1. Par. 3 of the operative part of the FIFA DRC Decision dated 7 February 2014 shall be partially set aside and the claim of Ralph Serginho Greene, which exceeds the amount of EUR 58.333,36 plus 5% interest as from 18 October 2013 shall be dismissed.

2. The Respondent shall pay all costs in relation to the present procedure including the compensation of Appellant’s expenses in this procedure and attorney’s fees”.

27. On 28 April 2014, the CAS Court Office acknowledge receipt of the Statement of Appeal. The CAS Court Office acknowledged the Club’s nomination of Mr. Michele Bernasconi as an arbitrator. Further, the Respondent was requested to nominate an arbitrator within ten days of receipt of the letter.

28. On 2 May 2014, the Club filed its Appeal Brief, in accordance with Article R51 of the CAS Code. The Club challenged the Appealed Decision, submitting the following amended requests for relief:

“The Appellant’s Appeal shall be accepted and the FIFA DRC Decision dated 7 February 2014 revised in Chapter III par. 3 so that:

1. Par. 3 of the operative part of the FIFA DRC Decision dated 7 February 2014 shall be partially set aside and the claim of Ralph Serginho Greene, which exceeds the amount of EUR 58,500.- plus 5% interest as from 18 October 2013 shall be dismissed.

2. The Respondent shall pay all costs in relation to the present procedure including the compensation of Appellant’s expenses in this procedure and attorney’s fees”.

29. On 6 May 2014, the CAS Court Office acknowledged receipt of the Club’s Appeal Brief. Further, the Player was invited to file his Answer within twenty days of receipt of the letter.

30. On 14 May 2014, the Player nominated Mr. Hendrik W. Kesler as arbitrator.

31. On 21 May 2014, the Player filed his Answer, in accordance with Article R55 of the CAS Code, with the following requests for relief:

“The Respondent therefore requests that the Panel rejects the Appeal and confirms the FIFA DRC Decision of 7 February 2014. In addition to the above defence and in the event that this is successful, the Respondent shall request the Panel to grant an order that the Appellant shall be liable for all costs and expenses incurred by the Respondent in bringing this Statement of Defence, including the costs and expenses of the CAS”.

32. On 23 May 2014, the CAS Court Office acknowledged receipt of the Player’s Answer. Further, the parties were requested to confirm, by 30 May 2014, whether they preferred for a hearing to be held or for the Panel to issue an award based solely on the parties’ written submissions.

33. On 26 May 2014, the CAS Court Office informed the parties that Mr. Michele Bernasconi had declined his nomination as arbitrator. Thus, the Club was invited to nominate another arbitrator by 30 May 2014.

34. On 28 May 2014, the Player confirmed that he wished for the Panel to issue an award based on the parties written submissions.

35. On 29 May 2014, the Club confirmed that it wished for a hearing to be held.

36. On 30 May 2014, the Club nominated Mr. Bernhard Heusler as an arbitrator.

37. On 20 August 2014, the CAS Court Office informed the parties that, pursuant to Article 54 of the CAS Code, Mark A. Hovell, solicitor from Manchester, England, had been appointed as the President of the Panel and that Mr. Bernhard Heusler and Mr. Hendrik W. Kesler had been appointed as arbitrators in this matter.

38. On 28 August 2014, the CAS Court Office, on behalf of the Panel, requested the FIFA file in relation to the dispute.

39. On 9 September 2014, the Player provided the CAS with his employment contract and image rights agreement with Larnaca (hereinafter referred to as the “Larnaca Agreements”). Further, the Player confirmed that he was available for a hearing on 13 November 2014. Subsequently, the CAS Court Office provided the Club with the agreements.

40. On 11 September 2014, FIFA provided the complete file in relation to the matter.

41. On 11 September 2014, the CAS Court Office, on behalf of the Panel, called the parties and their witnesses to appear at the hearing on 13 November 2014 at the CAS headquarters.

42. On 12 September 2014, the CAS Court Office provided the FIFA file to the parties.

43. On 14 October 2014, the Club, having reviewed the Larnaca Agreements and the FIFA file, made a further procedural request concerning other documents referred to within the Larnaca Agreement and for details of payments made by Larnaca to the Player.

44. On 16 October 2014, the CAS Court Office wrote to the Player confirming the Panel’s decision to allow the Club’s procedural request.

45. On 21 October 2014, the Player provided the CAS Court Office with a settlement agreement dated 30 September 2013 with Larnaca (hereinafter referred to as the “Settlement Agreement”).

46. On 11 November 2014, the CAS Court Office reminded the Player of the Panel’s procedural request and asked each party to provide the other with any jurisprudence either intended to rely upon at the hearing.

47. On 11 November 2014, the Player provided a copy of a letter from Larnaca addressed to the CAS Court Office stating that it was unwilling to provide any documents relating to the Larnaca Agreements, or payments made pursuant to these, as this was confidential information. Larnaca did, however, confirm that the Larnaca Agreements provided by the Player were “the correct contract”.

48. On 12 November 2014, the Club submitted a witness statement of Mr. Marko Nikolic, the former head coach of the Club. Also, on 12 November 2014, the Player submitted a copy of CAS 2008/A/1677 and a summary of many other breach of contract cases from the DRC.

IV. THE HEARING

49. On 14 September 2014, the CAS Court office informed the parties that the Panel had determined to convene a hearing.

50. A hearing was held on 13 November 2014 at the CAS premises in Lausanne, Switzerland. The parties did not raise any objection as to the appointment of the Panel. The Panel was assisted by Mr. Christopher Singer, Counsel to CAS. The following persons attended the hearing: i. Appellant: Mr. Damjanovic, Mr. Del Fabro and Ms. Damjanovic, all counsel; Mr. Radisav Rabrenovic, former General Secretary of the Club, witness (by telephone); and Ms. Jelena Lukic, interpreter. ii. Respondent: The Player and Mr. Van Megen, counsel.

51. At the hearing, the Club provided the Panel and the Player with some print outs from the internet, demonstrating the playing record of the Player with Larnaca and a schedule produced by the Club calculating what it submitted was the total amount of income the Player had received from Larnaca between 8 January and 31 May 2014.

52. The Player contested these late filings, along with the witness statement of Mr. Nikolic. The Panel determined to allow these late filings as (1) in the case of the internet print outs, these assisted the Panel and the Player was given the opportunity during the hearing to confirm the accuracy of them; (2) in the case of the schedule, the Player was again given the opportunity during the hearing to confirm or dispute each line and the Panel further noted that the Player had not complied with its procedural request by producing either evidence from Larnaca or a

statement from his own bank account (albeit at the very end of the hearing the Player did offer to produce the bank statement, but the Panel determined that he had ample time to do this prior to the hearing) to demonstrate exactly what sums he had received from Larnaca; and (3) in relation to Mr. Nikolic’s statement, the Panel noted that the question of whether the Player had terminated with or without just cause was not disputed, so placed no real importance on this statement.

53. The parties were given the opportunity to present their cases, to make their submissions and arguments and to answer questions posed by the Panel. After the parties’ final, closing submissions, the hearing was closed and the Panel reserved its detailed decision to this written award.

54. Upon closing the hearing, the parties expressly stated that they had no objections in relation to their right to be heard and had been treated equally in these arbitration proceedings. The Panel had carefully taken into account in its subsequent deliberation all the evidence and the arguments presented by the parties, both in their written submissions and at the hearing, even if they had not been summarised in the present award.

V. THE PARTIES’ SUBMISSIONS — A. Appellant’s Submissions

55. In summary, the Club submits the following in support of its Appeal:

56. The Player was engaged by the Club as a professional football player. In the period from August to December 2012, the Player played in less than 40% of the matches for the Club. Despite the failed expectations from the Player, all financial obligations towards him were fulfilled. In the period from August to December 2012 the Player was paid an amount of 7,583.531 RSD, approximately EUR 66,575.35.

57. In January 2013, the Player insisted on being loaned to Larnaca until the summer registration period of 2013. At the time when the Loan Agreement was concluded, the Player was owed one month’s salary for December 2012 in the amount of EUR 9,583.33 and an unpaid bonus in the amount of EUR 1,341.32. A total of EUR 10,924.65.

58. Whilst the Player was on loan at Larnaca, the Club had no financial obligations towards the Player. In accordance with the Loan Agreement, the Player was on loan from 30 January 2013 until 17 June 2013.

59. Due to the sudden death of the President of the Club, the Club suffered financial difficulties. From the Summer of 2013, the Club was late with the payment of salaries to its players.

60. The Club offered the Player, on more than one occasion, compensation to terminate the Contract and provided him with a free transfer to any other Club. However, it was obvious that the Player did not take any reasonable actions to find new employment.

61. The Player terminated the Contract in August 2013 and subsequently signed for Larnaca in January 2014. The Club submitted that the Player should have earned at Larnaca at least as much as he earned whilst he was with the Club.

62. Before the DRC, the Player stated that he earned only EUR1,500 per month whilst at Larnaca. Taking into account that Larnaca, under the Loan Agreement, were covering EUR 9,583.32 per month, this is “obviously wrong”. If the Player has concluded an employment contract with such a low salary, such behaviour would be “an abuse of legal right” and the Player would intentionally have failed to earn an adequate remuneration. The Club assumed that the Player earned at Larnaca as much as he would have earned at the Club. Further, the Club requested that the Panel should also take into account the Player’s salary for any period after July 2014 in case the initial contract with Larnaca had been manipulated with the knowledge of this case.

63. The appeal procedure dealt only with the amount of compensation corresponding to the remaining value of the Contract. The Panel should take into account the Player’s responsibility and liability for the termination of the Contract and therefore reduce the amount awarded. Further, a possible signing on fee and any image right sums have to be deducted. As the Club believe the Player has or could have fully mitigate his position with Larnaca, the Player’s claim is unjustified as from 1 January 2014 and therefore has to be dismissed.

64. The Player, knowing that the Club had financial difficulties due to the sudden death of the President, is also liable for the termination of the Contract as he was not willing to find a reasonable settlement. Therefore, a deduction of around a sixth of any compensation is justified. The Club relied upon Article 337(b)(2) of the Swiss Code of Obligations (hereinafter referred to as the “SCO”) arguing that the Player was also in breach of the Contract by refusing to train and by not being willing to accept a settlement to leave the Club.

65. At the hearing, the Club focused on the Settlement Agreement and the Larnaca Agreements. It submitted that the Player had been paid in full by Larnaca during his loan period, in accordance with the Loan Agreement and that the EUR 20,250 refered to in the Settlement Agreement was in reality 5 monthly salaries of EUR 4,050 that were hidden from (or in addition to) the EUR 1,500 monthly salary declared to FIFA. The Club also noted that there was an additional monthly sum of EUR 1,000 for the Player’s image rights and a payment of EUR 500 each time the Player took the field for more than 20 minutes for Larnaca, under the exhibit to the Larnaca Agreements, which had not been provided to FIFA. Further, the Club questioned the validity of the Settlement Agreement as it was never signed by Larnaca. Further, if the Player was really owed EUR 20,500 by Larnaca, why did he not complain to FIFA? Why would he rejoin a team that wasn’t paying him before?

66. In total, the monthly payments from Larnca to the Player were closer to those the Club had been paying the Player under the Contract. The Club argued that Larnaca had already shown its willingness to pay the Player at that rate under the Loan Agreement, so why wouldn’t it pay the same to the Player a few months later and why would the Player accept the low basic wage he declared to FIFA? There was no “Article 17 risk” to Larnaca in signing the Player. It knew the Player had more than 3 month’s arrears due from the Club, which FIFA would treat as grounds for the Player to end the Contract, and that he was allowed to leave, free of any transfer

fee. The Player and Larnaca were in reality hiding other sums, so the Panel should treat the Player as having fully mitigated his losses from January 2014, when he joined Larnaca.

67. In the alternative, when looking at the month of June 2014 too, the Club calculated that Larnaca had in reality paid the Player the sum of EUR 45,416, so that sum should be used by the Panel as the amount by which the Player mitigated his losses.

B. Respondent’s Submissions

68. In summary, the Player submits the following in defence:

69. After not receiving a large part of the salary agreed upon and after putting the Club on notice, the Player lodged his claim before FIFA for termination of the Contract with just cause. It is important to note that the Club, although having been invited to by FIFA, never replied to the claim of the Player.

70. There is an obligation for parties to respond properly on requests of a governing body within sport. It is also compliant with principles of due process and governance to do so. The Club has not explained or given a satisfactory reason for not doing so. As the Club have waited for the Appealed Decision and then appealed, this is evidence of the Club’s bad faith as the only reason for doing so is to gain time so that they do not have to pay what is due to the Player.

71. The evidence produced by the Club as part of the Appeal Brief to the CAS should be excluded pursuant to Article R57 of the CAS Code, as the Club could have produced it all before FIFA. Further, the Appeal is lacking grounds and substantiation and has to be rejected.

72. After returning to the Club, after being loaned to Larnaca, the Player was excluded from the team and not allowed to train with the squad. He was also not being paid.

73. In July 2013, the Player’s representative informed the Club in writing that the Player had not been paid for different periods. Further, in August 2013, another letter was sent to the Club in relation to the non-payments and the fact that the Player was not being allowed to train. The Player explicitly offered his services to the Club and insisted on fulfilling the mutual obligations. These letters (which the Club acknowledged receiving) were clear notices that if the payments were not made the Player would terminate the Contract and go to FIFA.

74. Having not received the claimed payments from the Club within the deadlines set, by way of the Termination Letter, the Player terminated the contract with just cause, in order to be able to sign with another club in the summer transfer window.

75. In its Appeal Brief, the Club acknowledges that it was in breach of the Contract and it acknowledges that it owed the Player an amount of EUR 58,500. The Club refers to the sudden death of the President of the Club, however they had not mentioned this before. Moreover, the Contract was between the Player and the Club, not the President.

76. The Player did not receive the Club’s letters of 14 June 2013 and 17 July 2013. These letters were addressed to a third party who was not the agent of the Player. They also contradict the letters sent by the Player in July and August 2013, in which he offered his services to the Club.

77. Although the Club did offer compensation to terminate the Contract, the Player saw no reason to accept these offers due to the difference between the offers and the remaining value of the Contract. At the time, there was no reason for the Player to take any actions in finding new employment as he was still under contract with the Club and intended to respect his obligations.

78. The Player submitted that there is no reason for the Panel to take mitigation into account. If the Panel determines to do so, then the new contract with Larnaca reflected the Player’s position, at that time. Firstly he had not been able to play for half a season and therefore was not up to match fitness. Secondly, the fact that he was in dispute with the Club meant that there was an “Article 17 risk” that any new club could be held jointly and severally liable in case the Player did not terminate with just cause and had to pay damages to the Club. Thirdly, the winter transfer window was closing and he had to take the only offer to carry on playing. Fourthly, moves in winter transfer windows are difficult, as most clubs have full squads and have spent their budgets. This all reduced the Player’s bargaining power and together resulted in the reduction in wages he could earn to the level in the Larnaca Agreements.

79. FIFA correctly applied the relevant amounts deriving from the new contract with Larnaca. The Club has not substantiated the argument that the Player was also at fault in relation to the termination of the Contract and there is no reason for the Panel to apply Swiss law.

80. At the hearing, the Player confirmed that the Settlement Agreement was in relation to unpaid salaries during his loan period with Larnaca and had now been paid. He disputed the Club’s allegation that this was a sham and really represented part payment for his services post-January 2014. He also disputed that it was invalidated as the copy he had provided to the CAS was not signed by Larnaca.

81. The Player, when examined by the Club at the hearing, did confirm all payments from Larnaca (including for his image rights) went into his Cypriot bank account. However, when going through the Club’s schedule produced at the hearing, he denied receiving any payments for his image rights. He also said that he did not receive any monies for June 2014, just for the 5 months prior to that. Finally, he confirmed receipt of his bonuses for the “fourteen or fifteen” league matches and three cup matches he represented Larnaca in. However, he argued that such bonuses should not be taken into account as mitigation, as he lost the opportunity to earn similar bonuses with the Club.

82. The Player finally confirmed that he rejoined Larnaca as he had no other choice and that by then a new management regime existed at that Club and indeed, at the Cyprus Football Association, which helped players get paid.