The judgement of FIFA’s Dispute Resolution Chamber in the conflict between the Brazilian Matuzalem and his previous club Shakhtar Donetsk has important consequences, according to FIFPro lawyer Wil van Megen: ‘Increasingly, clubs hope to strengthen their position with contractually determined high compensations. However, this hope does not always seem to be justified.’ Of the € 25 million which was claimed by Shakhtar, only € 6.25 million was accepted by the DRC.

When the Brazilian Matuzalem received an offer from Zaragoza after 3 years of his 5 year contract with Shakhtar, he wanted nothing more than to play in the Spanish Primera Division. 

Negotiations followed concerning a transfer sum. But when the clubs could not come to an agreement, he decided to force the issue by making use of the possibility offered by article 17 of the FIFA rules: After the period of stability of 3 years (for players under 28 years of age) he unilaterally severed his contract. This gave him the freedom to sign for Zaragoza. 

Pending the compensation amount which would have to be paid FIFA gave the Brazilian permission to play for his new club Zaragoza. Following this Donetsk approached the DRC with a claim for € 25 million. 

Van Megen: ‘But the DRC only accepted a quarter of that amount. Of great importance in the case was the judgement that the contractually determined amount of € 25 million could not be considered as an objective factor in Article 17 of the FIFA rules.’ 

According to the FIFPro lawyer this has among other things consequences for the controversial so called ‘Spanish clause’, whereby Spanish clubs contractually determine that upon severance of the contract a player should have to pay compensation sometimes amounting to more than 300 times his annual salary. 

Van Megen: ‘Although this clause seems to be legitimized by Royal Decree, a Spanish judge has recently made the judgement that these compensations could be disproportional. The DRC judgement in the Matuzalem case appears to be an infringement under the contractually determined high compensations.’ 

Shakhtar Donetsk have lodged an appeal against the DRC judgement. The verbal consideration will take place before the highest professional body CAS on 19 September. 

Read here the complete legal explanation about the Matuzalem case from FIFPro lawyer Wil van Megen.