F.I.F.A. – Commissione per lo Status dei Calciatori (2012-2013) – controversie agenti di calciatori – ———- F.I.F.A. – Players’ Status Committee (2012-2013) – players’ and match agents disputes – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 23 April 2013, by Geoff Thompson (England) Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee, on the claim presented by the Players’ Agent Players’ Agent K, from country G as “Claimant” against the club Club S, from country I as “Respondent” regarding a contractual dispute arisen between the parties.

F.I.F.A. - Commissione per lo Status dei Calciatori (2012-2013) – controversie agenti di calciatori – ---------- F.I.F.A. - Players' Status Committee (2012-2013) – players’ and match agents disputes – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 23 April 2013, by Geoff Thompson (England) Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee, on the claim presented by the Players’ Agent Players’ Agent K, from country G as “Claimant” against the club Club S, from country I as “Respondent” regarding a contractual dispute arisen between the parties. I. Facts of the case 1. On 29 January 2010, the players’ agent K, (hereinafter: the Claimant), licensed by the country G Football Association, and Club S, from country I (hereinafter: the Respondent) concluded an agreement entitled “commission agreement” (hereinafter: the agreement) in accordance with which the Claimant was entitled to receive from the Respondent as commission “for the agent [i.e. the Claimant] services in connection with the transfer of professional football player T [hereinafter: the player] (..) from Club S, from country I [i.e. the Respondent]” the amount of EUR 260,000 as follows: EUR 100,000 on 25 March 2010, EUR 80,000 on 15 September 2010 and EUR 80,000 on 15 September 2011. 2. On 17 August 2012, the Claimant lodged a claim with FIFA against the Respondent requesting from the latter the payment of EUR 80,000, corresponding to the last instalment due as per the agreement on 15 September 2011 and requested FIFA to impose the costs of the proceedings on the Respondent. 3. The Claimant further explained that the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee had already passed a decision on 11 May 2012 regarding the first two instalments stipulated in the agreement and had ordered the Respondent to pay the Claimant the total amount of EUR 180,000. The Claimant added that the Respondent had subsequently failed to pay the third instalment in the amount of EUR 80,000 that the latter should have paid on 15 September 2011. 4. In its response dated 10 September 2012, the Respondent rejected the Claimant’s claim in its entirety. In this respect, the Respondent was of the opinion that the claim should be considered inadmissible because of the “res judicata” principle since a decision had already been taken in this matter. 5. On 27 November 2012, the Claimant rejected the Respondent’s allegations and insisted that the subject of this present claim was only the third instalment of EUR 80,000 as stipulated in the agreement. The Claimant further explained that the third instalment provided in the agreement “was previously never the subject of the decision dated 11 May 2012”. Therefore, the Claimant deemed that “the subjects of the disputes are definitely not identical”. 6. On 4 March 2013, in its last position, the Respondent reiterated its previous statements and allegations. II. Considerations of the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee 1. First of all, the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee (hereinafter also simply referred to as: the Single Judge) analysed which procedural rules are applicable to the matter at hand. In this respect, the Single Judge referred to art. 21 par. 2 and 3 of the Rules Governing the Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber (edition 2012). In view of the fact that the present matter was submitted to FIFA on 17 August 2012, the Single Judge concluded that the 2008 edition of the Rules Governing the Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: the Procedural Rules) is applicable to the present matter. 2. Subsequently, the Single Judge analysed which edition of the FIFA Players’ Agents Regulations should be applicable. In this respect, he confirmed that in accordance with art. 39 par. 1 and 4 of the 2008 edition of the Players’ Agents Regulations, and considering that the present claim was lodged on 17 August 2012, the current edition of the Players’ Agents Regulations (edition 2008; hereinafter: the Regulations) is applicable to the matter at stake. 3. The applicable regulations having been established, the Single Judge went on to assess whether he was competent to hear the present matter and recalled that the Respondent had argued in its submissions that FIFA was not competent to deal with the dispute as a decision had already been passed by the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee in the present matter on 11 May 2012. 4. In order to determine the aforementioned as well as to establish whether he was competent to hear the present matter, the Single Judge deemed that he had first to analyse the content of the decision passed by the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee on 11 May 2012 as well as the content of the agreement of 29 January 2010 concluded between the Claimant and the Respondent which stipulated, in particular, that the Claimant would be entitled to receive from the Respondent a total commission amounting to EUR 260,000 as follows: EUR 100,000 on 25 March 2010, EUR 80,000 on 15 September 2010 and EUR 80,000 on 15 September 2011. 5. In doing so, the Single Judge duly noted that the decision of the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee dated 11 May 2012 concerned exclusively the first two instalments and not the last instalment which was requested by the Claimant in the present dispute. Consequently, and since the subject of the claim in the present matter was different than the one in the decision passed by the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee on 11 May 2012 and since the aforementioned decision of the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee was passed before the last instalment of EUR 80,000 had become due, the Single Judge was keen to stress that, provided the condition contained in art. 30 par. 2 of the Regulations is also met, he was competent to deal with the present matter. 6. Consequently, based on art. 30 par. 2 of the Regulations and in view of the aforementioned considerations, the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee held that FIFA is competent to deal with the present matter since it concerned a dispute between a players’ agent licensed by the country G Football Association and an Italian club, regarding an alleged outstanding commission. As a consequence, the Single Judge held that he was competent to decide on the present matter which had an international dimension. 7. His competence and the applicable regulations having been established, and entering into the substance of the present matter, the Single Judge started by acknowledging the abovementioned facts and the arguments of the parties as well as the documentation contained in the file. In particular, the Single Judge took note once again that the Claimant and the Respondent had signed an agreement on 29 January 2010 under the terms of which the Claimant was entitled to receive from the Respondent as commission in connection with the transfer of the player the total amount of EUR 260,000 as follows: EUR 100,000 on 25 March 2010, EUR 80,000 on 15 September 2010 and EUR 80,000 on 15 September 2011. 8. In this context and in accordance with the basic legal principle of pacta sunt servanda, which in essence means that agreements must be respected by the parties in good faith, the Single Judge held that the Claimant was entitled to receive from the Respondent the last instalment provided in the agreement and originally due on 15 September 2011, i.e. EUR 80,000, as commission. 9. Therefore and in view of all of the above, the Single Judge decided that the claim of the Claimant should be accepted and that therefore, the Respondent has to pay to the Claimant the amount of EUR 80,000, as requested by the latter. 10. Finally, the Single Judge referred to art. 25 par. 2 of the Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players in combination with art. 18 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules, according to which, in the proceedings before the Players’ Status Committee, including the Single Judge, costs in the maximum amount of currency of country H 25,000 are levied. The relevant provision further states that the costs are to be borne in consideration of the parties’ degree of success in the proceedings. 11. On account of the above and considering that the claim of the Claimant has been fully accepted, the Single Judge concluded that the Respondent has to bear the entire costs of the current proceedings before FIFA. Furthermore and according to Annexe A of the Procedural Rules, the costs of the proceedings are to be levied on the basis of the amount in dispute. On that basis, the Single Judge held that the amount to be taken into consideration in the present proceedings is EUR 80,000. Consequently, the Single Judge concluded that the maximum amount of costs of the proceedings corresponds to currency of country H 10,000. 12. In conclusion, and in view of the circumstances of the present matter, the Single Judge determined the costs of the current proceedings to the amount of currency of country H 10,000. Consequently, the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee decided that the amount of currency of country H 10,000 has to be paid by the Respondent in order to cover the costs of the present proceedings. III. Decision of the Single Judge of Players’ Status Committee 1. The claim of the Claimant, Players’ Agent K, is admissible. 2. The claim of the Claimant, Players’ Agent K, is accepted. 3. The Respondent, Club S, has to pay to the Claimant, Players’ Agent K, the total amount of EUR 80,000, within 30 days as from the date of notification of this decision. 4. If the aforementioned amount is not paid within the aforementioned deadline, an interest rate of 5% per year will apply as of the expiry of the fixed time limit and the present matter shall be submitted, upon request, to FIFA’s Disciplinary Committee for consideration and a formal decision. 5. The final costs of the proceedings in the amount of currency of country H 10,000 are to be paid by the Respondent, Club S, within 30 days as from the notification of the present decision as follows: 5.1 The amount of currency of country H 8,000 has to be paid to FIFA to the following bank account with reference to case nr.: 5.2 The amount of currency of country H 2,000 has to be paid to the Claimant, Players’ Agent K. 6. The Claimant, Players’ Agent K, is directed to inform the Respondent, Club S, immediately and directly of the account number to which the remittance under points 3 and 5.2 above is to be made and to notify the Players’ Status Committee of every payment received. **** Note relating to the motivated decision (legal remedy): According to art. 67 par. 1 of the FIFA Statutes, this decision may be appealed against before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The statement of appeal must be sent to the CAS directly within 21 days of receipt of notification of this decision and shall contain all the elements in accordance with point 2 of the directives issued by the CAS, a copy of which we enclose hereto. Within another 10 days following the expiry of the time limit for filing the statement of appeal, the appellant shall file a brief stating the facts and legal arguments giving rise to the appeal with the CAS (cf. point 4 of the directives). The full address and contact numbers of the CAS are the following: Court of Arbitration for Sport Avenue de Beaumont 2 1012 Lausanne - Switzerland Tel: +41 21 613 50 00 Fax: +41 21 613 50 01 e-mail: info@tas-cas.org www.tas-cas.org For the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee Jérôme Valcke Secretary General Encl. CAS Directives