F.I.F.A. – Camera di Risoluzione delle Controversie (2012-2013) – contributo di solidarietà – ———- F.I.F.A. – Dispute Resolution Chamber (2012-2013) – solidarity contribution – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber(DRC) judge passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 6 March 2013, by Theo van Seggelen (the Netherlands), DRC judge, on the claim presented by the club, Club U, from country P as Claimant against the club, Club M, from country F as Respondent regarding solidarity contribution in connection with the international transfer of the player A

F.I.F.A. - Camera di Risoluzione delle Controversie (2012-2013) - contributo di solidarietà – ---------- F.I.F.A. - Dispute Resolution Chamber (2012-2013) - solidarity contribution – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber(DRC) judge passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 6 March 2013, by Theo van Seggelen (the Netherlands), DRC judge, on the claim presented by the club, Club U, from country P as Claimant against the club, Club M, from country F as Respondent regarding solidarity contribution in connection with the international transfer of the player A I. Facts of the case 1. According to the player passport issued by the country P Football Federation, the Player A, from country P (hereinafter: the player), born in June 1981, was registered with Club U, from country P (hereinafter: the Claimant), as from 1 July 2002 until 10 February 2003 and from 30 July 2003 until 15 August 2006. 2. The football seasons in country P during the period of time the player was registered with the Claimant started on 1 July and ended on 30 June of the following year. 3. The country F Football Federation confirmed that the player was registered with Club M (hereinafter: the Respondent) on 18 August 2009 as a professional. 4. On 28 December 2009, the Claimant contacted FIFA claiming its proportion of the solidarity contribution in connection with the transfer of the player concerned from the Club P, from country P to the Respondent for the alleged transfer compensation of EUR 1,500,000. In particular, the Claimant requested EUR 15,308, plus 5% interest p.a. as from the 31st day of the player’s registration with the Respondent. 5. In spite of having been invited by FIFA to provide its position regarding the claim, the Respondent did not make any statements during the course of the investigation in relation to the claim lodged by the Claimant. II. Considerations of the DRC judge 1. First of all, the Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) judge (hereinafter: the DRC judge) analysed whether he was competent to deal with the case at hand. In this respect, he took note that the present matter was submitted to FIFA on 28 December 2009. Consequently, 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 matter at hand (cf. art. 21 par. 1 and 2 of 2008 and 2012 editions of the Procedural Rules). 2. Subsequently, the DRC judge referred to art. 3 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules and confirmed that in accordance with art. 24 par. 1 and 2 in combination with art. 22 lit. d) of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2012) he is competent to decide on the present matter relating to a dispute regarding the solidarity mechanism between clubs belonging to different associations. 3. Furthermore, the DRC judge analysed which regulations should be applicable as to the substance of the matter. In this respect, he confirmed that in accordance with art. 26 par. 1 and 2 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (editions 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2012), and considering that the player was registered with the Respondent on 18 August 2009 as well as that the present claim was lodged on 28 December 2009, the 2008 edition of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (hereinafter: the Regulations) is applicable to the matter at hand as to the substance. 4. The competence of the DRC judge and the applicable regulations having been established, the DRC judge entered into the substance of the matter. The DRC judge started by acknowledging the above-mentioned facts of the case as well as the documentation on file. 5. In this respect, the DRC judge noted that the Claimant claimed the payment of the amount of EUR 15,308 as solidarity contribution from the Respondent in relation with the transfer of the player from Club P to the Respondent for an alleged transfer compensation of EUR 1,500,000. 6. Moreover, the DRC judge took note that the Respondent did not make any statements during the course of the investigation in relation to the claim of the Claimant. In this way, so the DRC judge deemed, the Respondent renounced to its right of defence and, thus, accepted the allegations of the Claimant. 7. As a consequence, the DRC judge established that in accordance with art. 9 par. 3 of the Procedural Rules he shall take a decision upon the basis of the documents on file. 8. Having established the above, the DRC judge referred to art. 21 of the Regulations in combination with art. 1 of Annexe 5 of the Regulations which stipulate that, if a professional moves during the course of a contract, 5% of any compensation, not including training compensation paid to his former club, shall be deducted from the total amount of this compensation and be distributed by the new club as a solidarity contribution to the club(s) involved in the training and education of the player in proportion of the number of years the player has been registered with the relevant club(s) between the seasons of his 12th and 23rd birthday. 9. In this respect, the DRC judge recalled again that the Respondent had not specifically replied to the claim of the Claimant and therefore ruled that the Respondent did not provide any argument which would justify the non-payment of the proportion of solidarity contribution to the Claimant. 10. Subsequently, the DRC judge considered that he had to determine which should be the relevant amount of the solidarity contribution to be paid by the Respondent to the Claimant. In this regard, the DRC judge went on to establish the proper calculation of the relevant proportion of solidarity contribution due to the Claimant. 11. To that end, the DRC judge referred to art. 1 of Annexe 5 of the Regulations which provides the figures for the distribution of the solidarity contribution, according to the period of time the player was effectively trained by a specific club and taking into consideration the age of the player at the time he was being training and educated by the club(s) concerned. 12. In this respect, the DRC judge recalled that, according to the player passport issued by the country P Football Federation, the player, born in June 1981, was registered with the Claimant as from 1 July 2002 until 10 February 2003 and from 30 July 2003 until 15 August 2006. 13. On account of the above and in accordance with art. 1 of Annexe 5 of the Regulations, the DRC judge considered that the Claimant is, thus, entitled to receive solidarity contribution for the period as from 1 July 2002 until 10 February 2003, i.e. for 7 months of the season of the player’s 22nd birthday, as well as for the period as from 30 July 2003 until 30 June 2004, i.e. for 11 months of the season of the player’s 23rd birthday. In terms of the percentage of the 5% solidarity contribution, the judge calculated that, on a pro rata basis, this corresponds to 15% of 5%. 14. In view of all the above and taking into consideration that the alleged transfer compensation of EUR 1,500,000 was not contested by the Respondent, the DRC judge decided that the Respondent must pay to the Claimant the amount of EUR 11,250 plus default interest at a rate of 5% p.a. on the said amount as of 18 September 2009 until the date of effective payment. 15. Lastly, the DRC judge referred to art. 18 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules, according to which, in proceedings before the DRC, as well as the DRC judge, relating to disputes regarding training compensation and the solidarity mechanism, costs in the maximum amount of currency of country H 25’000 are levied. It is further stipulated that the costs are to be borne in consideration of the parties’ degree of success in the proceedings and, in accordance with Annexe A of the Procedural Rules, the costs of the proceedings are to be levied on the basis of the amount in dispute. 16. In respect of the above, the DRC judge held that the amount to be taken into consideration in the present proceedings is EUR 15,308 related to the claim of the Claimant. Consequently, the DRC judge concluded that the maximum amount of costs of the proceedings corresponds to currency of country H 5,000 (cf. table in Annexe A of the Procedural Rules). 17. As a result, considering that the case at hand did not pose any particular factual difficulties and taking into account the degree of success, the DRC judge determined the final costs of the current proceedings to the amount of currency of country H 2,000 which shall be borne by the Respondent. ***** III. Decision of the DRC judge 1. The claim of the Claimant, Club U, is partially accepted. 2. The Respondent, Club M, has to pay to the Claimant, within 30 days as from the date of notification of this decision, the amount of EUR 11,250 plus interest at 5% p.a. on said amount as of 18 September 2009 until the date of effective payment. 3. In the event that the aforementioned sum plus interest is not paid within the stated time limit, the present matter shall be submitted, upon request, to FIFA’s Disciplinary Committee for consideration and a formal decision. 4. Any further claim lodged by the Claimant is rejected. 5. The final costs of the proceedings in the amount of currency of country H 2,000 are to be paid by the Respondent within 30 days as from the date of notification of the present decision to FIFA to the following bank account with reference to case nr.: 6. The Claimant is directed to inform the Respondent immediately and directly of the account number to which the remittance under point 2. above is to be made and to notify the DRC judge 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 DRC judge: Jérôme Valcke Secretary General Enclosed: CAS directives