Unpaid wages in football: payment, termination and FRF, FIFA and CAS jurisdiction

Overdue payments and termination are separate issues

A footballer who has not been paid should first establish which amounts are due and the desired outcome: continuing the relationship, agreeing a payment arrangement or terminating the contract. A claim for arrears does not automatically entail leaving the club. Nor does any delay, by itself, justify every form of termination.

In Romania, income may arise under an employment contract or a sports activity agreement. The assessment therefore concerns wages or contractual remuneration, as appropriate. The rules below address football.

Start with due dates and evidence

The calculation should identify each obligation, its due date, payments received and the outstanding balance. Bonuses must be checked against contractual conditions; a bonus clause alone does not mean every bonus can be claimed immediately. For signing-on fees, benefits or image rights income, the debtor under the relevant agreement must also be identified.

The notice should precisely identify the amounts claimed, the legal basis and the period allowed to remedy the breach. Proof of delivery matters. An informal message expressing dissatisfaction may not satisfy the regulatory requirements of a formal default notice.

• The contract, schedules, amendments and any termination agreement.
• Bank statements and documents concerning bonuses or deductions.
• Notices, the club’s responses and evidence of delivery.

FIFA: Article 12bis is different from Article 14bis

Article 12bis RSTP concerns overdue payables and possible sanctions for delays exceeding 30 days without a prima facie contractual basis. The creditor must give written notice allowing at least 10 days for payment. This procedure does not, by itself, authorise termination.

Article 14bis concerns just cause arising from failure to pay at least two monthly salaries when due, following written notice allowing at least 15 days for full compliance. For remuneration not payable monthly, the proportional equivalent must be assessed. The provision includes rules for certain contracts and collective agreements. Two overdue salaries do not necessarily mean 60 days of delay.

The FRF rules require a separate assessment

The RSTJF text published in the FRF regulations index provides, in Article 18.10(a), for a payment delay exceeding 60 days from the due date and notice allowing at least 15 days to remedy it. This domestic rule should not automatically be replaced by the FIFA formula. The applicable edition, subsequent amendments and specific contract must be checked.

Payment of overdue amounts may be pursued without ending the relationship. Where termination is also sought, its grounds and timing require separate preparation. Withdrawing from training before this assessment may create a further dispute over the player’s obligations.

Other breaches: training, health and abusive conduct

Contractual issues may also concern training conditions, medical care or pressure to accept reduced pay. FIFA recognises the relevance of abusive conduct intended to force termination or amendment of a contract. The facts should be documented and assessed together.

Not being selected for a match does not, by itself, establish abuse or just cause. Sporting decisions must be distinguished from unjustified isolation or breach of agreed obligations. Any damages claim depends on loss, evidence and the applicable rules.

Where is the dispute heard: FRF, FIFA, a court or CAS?

Jurisdiction does not follow solely from the involvement of a foreign player. For FIFA, the nature of the dispute and its international dimension matter. Subject to its conditions, the RSTP allows an exclusive written choice of a national body officially recognised by FIFA and preserves recourse to state courts for employment disputes. The contractual clause and the parties’ circumstances must be considered together.

CAS is an arbitral tribunal. An appeal requires a regulatory or contractual basis and exhaustion of the relevant internal remedies. An international element or a high claim value does not automatically establish jurisdiction. The deadline should be checked immediately upon service of a decision.

Diarra and forthcoming rules do not automatically justify departure

The Diarra judgment prompted FIFA amendments on compensation, the new club’s liability and international transfer certificates. The interim framework applies from 1 January 2025; the new RSTP enters into force on 1 January 2027, subject to transitional provisions. The administrative possibility of a transfer does not automatically resolve the contractual dispute.

Murar și Asociații can assess the documents, prepare notices and represent clients before the competent forum. A useful initial discussion starts with the contract, payment history and chronology of communications, to identify the available steps and their effect on the player’s career.

Useful questions

Related legal services

• Sports law for players and athletes
• Sports law for clubs and federations