strong hit! Honduran Rubillo Castillo expelled by Deportivo Pasto, FIFA orders him to pay millionaire to Chinese club

The bad news does not end for Rubio Castillo, who was announced as a booster for first-class Deportivo Pasto in Colombia, but failed to score due to legal issues.

After such a long wait and without being able to make his debut in the Coffee League, the Honduran player terminated his contract with the club, after Castillo had an unresolved legal issue with Chinese side Natong Zhiyun FC.

It must be remembered that Rubio was sued by Natong Zhiyun FC after finding out the penalty for the most important entity in world football, FIFA.

Carlo Costelli tells it all: his best goal, the team he loves, the level of CONCACAF and launches barbs to the youth of the National League.

The legal link between the Chinese team and the Honduran striker has occurred since December 2018, as they signed a “pre-contract” valid from January 2019 to December 2021, i.e. for a period of 3 years.

FIFA document on the Honduran player

On December 29, 2018, Honduran player Roman Rubio Castillo Alvarez and the Chinese club, Nantong Zion FC, entered into an agreement called “Pre-employment Contract”, valid from January 2019 to December 2021, i.e. for a period of 3 years.

Under the heading “Basic Salary,” the contract states the player’s annual fixed income. Net wages of up to $400,000, payable for the first year as follows: $50,000 net within 5 days of signing the pre-contract; Net $350,000 in 12 months with an average monthly salary of $29,167.

In her request for relief, the plaintiff requested damages for breach of contract in the amount of $1,200,000 (400,000*3) corresponding to the total/residual value of the contract.

Dispute Resolution Chamber Decision

The Dispute Resolution Chamber got to the heart of the matter. In doing so, he began to acknowledge the facts of the case. As well as the documents in the file. However, the Dispute Resolution Chamber stressed that in the following considerations it will refer only to facts, arguments and documentary evidence that it considers relevant to the assessment of the matter in question.

In particular, the Chamber notes that the player unilaterally terminated the contract on January 21, 2019 apparently because he refused to undergo a medical examination (see point I.4 to I.8 for the specified sequence of events).

For completeness, the Chamber notes that the player signed a contract with CD Saprissa only 7 days after termination (see point I.12 above). In the Chamber’s view, this circumstance reveals that the player was not interested in continuing his career with Nantong Zhiyun FC, as we were looking for other opportunities in a short period of time.

Based on the documents provided by the parties, it appears that according to the player’s employment contract with Nantong Zhiyun FC, the player will receive the full amount of $350,000 USD for one season (see Clause I.3 above).

On the other hand, the value of the new labor contract concluded between the player and the intervening party, which appeared to be valid until mid-July 2019, was $86,076 (15.650 * 5.5, February 2019). until mid-July 2019).

Thus, under the aforementioned employment contracts with the mentioned clubs, the player will have an approximate average income of $218,000 per year (i.e. $350,000 + 86.076/2). The Chamber understood that this amount would be compensation payable in light of its old jurisprudence in similar cases.

Thus, based on previous considerations, the Chamber decided that the player should pay US$218,000 (approximately 5.3 million lempiras) to Nantong Zhiyun FC as compensation for breach of contract. Likewise, the intervening party, under the terms of Art. 17 paragraph. 2 of the Regulations, jointly and severally, to pay the corresponding compensation.

However, the Board also wished to consider whether Nantong FC had any outstanding liability to the player on the date of termination.

In this regard, the Chamber indicated that under the contract, the player is entitled to receive a net amount of 50 thousand US dollars within 5 days of signing.

However, the department noted that no evidence of payment of this amount was provided.

In this sense, awarding compensation in favor of the aggrieved party has proven to be an effective method and has always been widely accepted as it ensures that the fundamental principle of respect for contracts is duly observed.