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 Players’ Status Committee passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 25 September 2012 in the following composition: Theo Zwanziger (Germany), Chairman V. Manilal Fernando (Sri Lanka), Deputy Chairman Chuck Blazer (USA), member Geoff Thompson (England), member Tai Nicholas (New Zealand), member Said Al Masri (Syria), member Aibek Alybaev (Kyrgyzstan), member Norman Darmanin Demajo (Malta), member Aminu Maigari (Nigeria), member Victor Cissé (Senegal), member Luis H. Bedoya (Colombia), member Juan Padron Morales (Spain), member Decio De Maria (Mexico), member on the claim presented by the Players’ Agent Players’ Agent A , from country I as “Claimant” against the club Club X, from country Z as “Respondent” regarding a claim for commission.

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 Players’ Status Committee passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 25 September 2012 in the following composition: Theo Zwanziger (Germany), Chairman V. Manilal Fernando (Sri Lanka), Deputy Chairman Chuck Blazer (USA), member Geoff Thompson (England), member Tai Nicholas (New Zealand), member Said Al Masri (Syria), member Aibek Alybaev (Kyrgyzstan), member Norman Darmanin Demajo (Malta), member Aminu Maigari (Nigeria), member Victor Cissé (Senegal), member Luis H. Bedoya (Colombia), member Juan Padron Morales (Spain), member Decio De Maria (Mexico), member on the claim presented by the Players’ Agent Players’ Agent A , from country I as “Claimant” against the club Club X, from country Z as “Respondent” regarding a claim for commission. I. Facts of the case 1. On 1 January 2011, the players’ agent licensed by The Football Association, agent A (hereinafter: the Claimant) and the club X from country Z (hereinafter: the Respondent) concluded a representation agreement (hereinafter: the agreement) related to the transfer of the player H (hereinafter: the player) from the club W from country N to the Respondent. In this respect, the agreement provided for the Claimant to receive from the Respondent the amount of EUR 300,000 “plus VAT, if due (..) within 15 days of the issuance of the ITC in favour of club X”. Furthermore, the agreement specified that the mentioned amount of EUR 300,000 was payable only in case the player was transferred to the Respondent “within and no later than January 31st, 2011 and such activity is actually carried out by the Agent [i.e. the Claimant] himself.” 2. On 6 January 2011, the player and the Respondent concluded an employment contract (hereinafter: the employment contract) valid from 7 January 2011 until 30 June 2015. 3. On 15 September 2011, the Claimant lodged a claim with FIFA against the Respondent, requesting from the latter the payment of EUR 300,000 “as well as any interest due”. In this respect, the Claimant argued that, although he had carried out “the required activity as set out in the Contract [i.e. the agreement]” and the player had been transferred from club W to the Respondent, the latter had failed to pay his commission in accordance with the agreement. 4. In its response dated 31 October 2011, the Respondent informed FIFA that it had scheduled a meeting with the agent “in order to solve the above case”. Furthermore, on 21 November 2011, the Respondent informed FIFA that its intervention was no longer required since it was evaluating “a friendly solution of the case” with the agent “on the ground of a proposal effected by player’s agent A.” 5. Eventually, no amicable agreement could be reached between the parties to the dispute and consequently, the Claimant asked FIFA, on 13 December 2011, to submit the matter to the Players’ Status Committee for consideration and a decision. 6. Following the above, on 15 December 2011, FIFA invited again the Respondent to provide its response as to the substance of the Claimant’s claim and informed the latter of the contents of art. 9 par. 3 of the Rules Governing the Procedure of the Players’ Status Committee and Dispute Resolution Chamber. Nevertheless, the Respondent failed to provide FIFA with a response. II. Considerations of the Players’ Status Committee 1. First of all, the Players’ Status Committee (hereinafter also referred to as: the Committee) analysed which procedural rules are applicable to the matter at hand. In this respect, it 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 2008). The present matter was submitted to FIFA on 15 September 2011, thus after 1 July 2008. Therefore, the Committee concluded that the current edition of the Procedural Rules (edition 2008; hereinafter: the Procedural Rules) is applicable to the matter at hand. 2. Subsequently, the Players’ Status Committee analysed which edition of the FIFA Players’ Agent Regulations should be applicable. In this respect, it 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 15 September 2011, the current edition of the Players’ Agents Regulations (edition 2008; hereinafter: the Regulations) is applicable to the matter at hand. 3. With regard to its competence, the Committee pointed out that in accordance with the provisions set out by the Regulations, FIFA has jurisdiction on matters relating to licensed players’ agents, i.e. on those individuals who hold a valid players’ agent licence issued by the relevant member Association. 4. The Players’ Status Committee continued its deliberations by indicating that the present matter concerns a dispute between a players’ agent licensed by the Football Association and an club from country Z, regarding an allegedly outstanding commission. 5. As a consequence, the Players’ Status Committee is the competent body to decide on the present matter which has an international dimension (cf. art. 30 par. 2 of the Regulations). 6. Its competence and the applicable regulations having been established, the Committee entered into the substance of the matter. In doing so and first of all, the Committee observed that, on 1 January 2011, the Claimant and the Respondent had concluded a representation agreement in connection with the transfer of the player H (hereinafter: the player) from the club W from country N to the Respondent in accordance with which the Claimant was entitled to receive from the latter as commission EUR 300,000 “plus VAT, if due (..) within 15 days of the issuance of the ITC in favour of club X”. Furthermore, the Committee acknowledged that, in accordance with the agreement, the relevant commission was payable only in case the player was transferred to the Respondent “within and no later than January 31st, 2011 and such activity is actually carried out by the Agent himself.” Moreover, the Committee took note that, on 6 January 2011 an employment contract had been concluded between the club and the player. 7. In continuation, the Committee observed that, in his claim to FIFA, the Claimant had requested the payment of the entire commission stipulated in the agreement, arguing that although the player had signed an employment contract with the Respondent, the latter had failed to pay him the relevant amount. Furthermore and in the same context, the Committee recalled that, for its part, the Respondent had not rejected the claim of the Claimant nor contested any of the allegations of the latter and had even manifested its intention to amicably settle the present dispute. 8. In view of the above, taking into account the basic legal principle of pacta sunt servanda, which in essence means that agreements must be respected by the parties in good faith and bearing in mind that, in accordance with the agreement, the Respondent had agreed to pay to the Claimant EUR 300,000 as commission for the transfer of the player, as well as considering that the prerequisites for the relevant payment had undisputedly been fulfilled and that the Respondent had never contested that the amount in question was still outstanding, the Single Judge ruled that the Claimant is entitled to receive from the Respondent EUR 300,000, corresponding to his commission as per the agreement. 9. As a consequence, the Committee concluded his deliberations on the present dispute by deciding that the Claimant’s claim is accepted, and therefore the Respondent must pay to the Claimant the amount of EUR 300,000, together with 5% interest per year on the said amount as from 15 September 2011. 10. Finally, the Committee referred to art. 25 par. 2 of the Regulations in combination with art. 18 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules, according to which in the proceedings before the Players’ Status Committee and the Single Judge, costs in the maximum amount of CHF 25,000 are levied. The costs are to be borne in consideration of the parties’ degree of success in the proceedings and are normally to be paid by the unsuccessful party. 11. In this respect, the Committee reiterated that the claim of the Claimant is accepted and that the Respondent is the party at fault. Therefore, the Committee decided that the Respondent has to bear the entire costs of the current proceedings in front of FIFA. 12. 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. Consequently and taking into account that the total amount at dispute in the present matter is higher than CHF 200,001, the Committee concluded that the maximum amount of costs of the proceedings corresponds to CHF 25,000. 13. In conclusion, and considering that the case at hand was decided by the Players’ Status Committee in corpore but that it did not show particular factual difficulties or specific legal complexities, the Committee determined the costs of the current proceedings to the amount of CHF 8,000. 14. Consequently, the amount of CHF 8,000 has to be paid by the Respondent to cover the costs of the present proceedings. III. Decision of the Players’ Status Committee 1. The claim of the Claimant, player’s agent A, is accepted. 2. The Respondent, Club X, has to pay to the Claimant, player’s agent A, the amount of EUR 300,000, as well as 5% interest per year on the said amount as from 15 September 2011 until the date of effective payment, within 30 days as from the date of notification of this decision. 3. If the aforementioned sum, plus interest, is not paid within the aforementioned deadline, the present matter shall be submitted, upon request, to FIFA’s Disciplinary Committee for consideration and a formal decision. 4. The final costs of the proceedings in the amount of CHF 8,000 are to be paid by the Respondent, Club X, within 30 days as from the date of notification of the present decision as follows: 4.1. The amount of CHF 3,000 has to be paid to FIFA to the following bank account with reference to case nr. xxxxxxxxxx: UBS Zurich Account number 366.677.01U (FIFA Players’ Status) Clearing number 230 IBAN: CH27 0023 0230 3666 7701U SWIFT: UBSWCHZH80A 4.2. The amount of CHF 5,000 has to be paid to the Claimant, player’s agent A. 5. The Claimant, player’s agent A, is directed to inform the Respondent, Club X, immediately and directly of the account number to which the remittances under points 2. and 4.2. above are 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