F.I.F.A. – Commissione per lo Status dei Calciatori (2013-2014) – controversie tra società – ———- F.I.F.A. – Players’ Status Committee (2013-2014) – club vs. club disputes – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 23 April 2014, by Mr Geoff Thompson (England) Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee, on the claim presented by the club Club W, from country T as “Claimant” against the club Club G, from country I as “Respondent” regarding a contractual dispute between the parties and relating to the player Z.

F.I.F.A. - Commissione per lo Status dei Calciatori (2013-2014) – controversie tra società – ---------- F.I.F.A. - Players' Status Committee (2013-2014) – club vs. club disputes – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 23 April 2014, by Mr Geoff Thompson (England) Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee, on the claim presented by the club Club W, from country T as “Claimant” against the club Club G, from country I as “Respondent” regarding a contractual dispute between the parties and relating to the player Z. I. Facts of the case 1. On 9 November 2011, Club W, from country T (hereinafter: “the Claimant”) and the Club G, from country I (hereinafter: “the Respondent”) concluded a transfer contract (hereinafter: “the contract”), in connection with the transfer of the player Z (hereinafter: “the player”) from the Claimant to the Respondent. 2. Point 1 of the contract stated that the Respondent will pay to the Claimant a fixed amount of EUR 200,000 “upon stipulation of the transfer agreement”. 3. Point 2 of the contract stated that the Respondent will pay to the Claimant a fixed amount of EUR 150,000 following the registration of the player with the Respondent as a professional. 4. On 15 August 2012, the Claimant lodged a complaint with FIFA against the Respondent requesting the payment of the alleged outstanding amount of EUR 150,000 under point 2 of the contract. 5. In particular, the Claimant alleged that the payment of EUR 150,000 should have been paid by the Respondent “3 days following receipt of the player´s registration which was completed on April 10th 2012 (ITC enclosed)”. 6. Moreover, the Claimant enclosed a letter of the Respondent dated 27 March 2012 by means of which the latter informed the Claimant of its commitment to pay the requested amount within the agreed deadline. The relevant letter stated as follows: “Club G confirms fully respect the contractual obligations towards Club W (Agreement between Club W and Club G of 9-11-2011. 2. Club G confirms payment immediately Fixed amount of EUR 150,000 … following the registration of Player Z by Club G (no later than 3 days)”. 7. On 24 October 2013, the Respondent presented its position regarding the present dispute and stated that its delay in paying was due to “an objective and significant reduction of the Club´s revenue relating to the domestic and international economic situation”. 8. In addition, the Respondent confirmed that the player was registered with it on 13 April 2012 but that he had acquired the status of professional only on 30 August 2012. 9. Moreover, the Respondent alleged that it had paid to the Claimant an amount of EUR 225,000 as follows: EUR 50,000 on 23 November 2011, EUR 75,000 on 27 February 2012, EUR 75,000 on 21 March 2012 and EUR 25,000 on 8 March 2013. Therefore, the Respondent stated that it had fulfilled the obligation under point 1 of the contract and that, with regard to point 2 of the contract, only an amount of EUR 125,000 remained outstanding. 10. On 14 November 2013, the Claimant confirmed that the player was registered with the Respondent on 13 April 2012 and that the outstanding amount in its favour was EUR 125,000. Moreover, the Claimant claimed interest for late payment. 11. On 13 January 2014, the Respondent apologised for the delay in the payment and proposed to pay the outstanding sum of EUR 125,000 in five monthly instalments of EUR 25,000 each, starting on 30 March 2014. 12. On 27 January 2014, the Claimant rejected the payment schedule made by the Respondent and proposed the following payment plan: EUR 50,000 on 8 February 2014, EUR 50,000 + currency of country H 4,000 (advance of costs) on 30 March 2014 and EUR 25,000 on 30 April 2014, plus a 5% annual interest from 16 April 2012 until the date of the final payment. 13. Finally, the Respondent presented a final payment plan in order to settle its debt of EUR 125,000 towards the Claimant, but the latter refused it and once again insisted that FIFA should pass a decision in the present matter obliging the Respondent to pay the outstanding amount of EUR 125,000, plus currency of country H 4,000 (advance of costs) and a 5% annual interest from 16 April 2012 until the date of effective payment. II. Considerations of the Single Judge of the Players´ Status Committee 1. First of all, the Single Judge of the Players´ Status Committee (hereinafter: “the Single Judge”) analysed whether he was competent to deal with the case in hand. In this respect, the Single Judge confirmed that, on the basis of art. 3 par. 1 of the 2012 edition of the Rules Governing the Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber in connection with art. 23 par. 1 and 3 as well as art. 22 lit. f) of the 2012 edition of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players, he was competent to deal with the matter at stake which concerns a dispute between two clubs affiliated to different associations. 2. Furthermore, the Single Judge analysed which Procedural Rules are applicable to the matter in hand. In this respect, he referred to art. 21 par. 2 and 3 of the 2012 and 2008 editions of the Rules Governing the Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber. Consequently, and since the present matter was submitted to FIFA on 15 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 matter in hand. 3. Subsequently, the Single Judge analysed which edition of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players should be applicable as to the substance of the matter. In this respect, he referred, on the one hand, to art. 26 par. 1 and 2 of the 2012 and 2010 editions of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players and, on the other hand, to the fact that the present claim was lodged with FIFA on 15 August 2012. In view of the foregoing, the Single Judge concluded that the 2010 edition of the FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (hereinafter: “the Regulations”) is applicable to the case at hand as to the substance. 4. His competence and the applicable regulations having been established, the Single Judge entered into the substance of the matter. In this respect, the Single Judge took note that, based on the evidence and positions of the Claimant and the Respondent, it was uncontested that both parties had agreed on the transfer of the player from the Claimant to the Respondent and that an amount of EUR 125,000 remained unpaid by the Respondent. 5. In particular, the Single Judge was keen to underline that, based on the Respondent´s position and behaviour during the course of the investigation, i.e. paying to the Claimant the amount of EUR 25,000 on 8 March 2013 and proposing alternative payment plans, the Respondent had clearly recognised that its contractual obligations towards the Claimant were the payment of the amounts of EUR 200,000 as provided under point 1 of the contract as well as the amount of EUR 150,000 as per point 2 of the contract and that the amount of EUR 125,000 was still outstanding. 6. In addition to the above, the Single Judge further noted that, by means of its letter dated 27 March 2012, the Respondent had expressly confirmed that it would fully comply with its contractual obligations towards the Claimant. 7. In light of the above, the Single Judge concluded that the Claimant should be entitled to receive the amount of EUR 125,000 from the Respondent as outstanding transfer compensation. 8. In continuation, the Single Judge took note that the Claimant also requested an interest of 5% per annum over the amount of EUR 125,000 as from 16 April 2012, i.e. three days after the player´s registration with the Respondent. 9. In this respect, the Single Judge referred to point 2 of the contract which established that the amount of EUR 150,000 should have been paid by the Respondent to the Claimant “following the registration of the player with the Respondent as a professional” and the content of the letter dated 27 March 2012 sent by the Respondent to the Claimant by means of which the Respondent promised to pay the sum of EUR 150,000 no later than 3 days following the registration of the player. 10. Taking into account the fact that both parties had confirmed that the player was registered with the Respondent on 13 April 2012 and in view of the content of the letter dated 27 March 2012 the Respondent had sent to the Claimant, the Single Judge concluded and that the payment of EUR 150,000 should have been paid by the Respondent to the Claimant three days after the date of registration of the player. Consequently, the Single Judge held that the interest requested should start running as from 16 April 2012. 11. On account of all of the above, the Single Judge held that the Claim of the Claimant is accepted and that the Respondent had to pay to the Claimant the amount of EUR 125,000 plus an interest of 5% per annum on the aforementioned amount from 16 April 2012 until the date of effective payment. 12. Finally, the Single Judge 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, including its Single Judge, costs in the maximum amount of currency of country H 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. 13. In respect of the above, the Single Judge reiterated that the Claimant’s claim is accepted. Therefore, the Single Judge concluded that the Respondent has to bear the costs of the current proceedings before FIFA. 14. 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. The amount in dispute to be taken into consideration in the present proceedings is EUR 125,000. Therefore, the Single Judge concluded that the maximum amount of costs of the proceedings corresponds to currency of country H 15,000. 15. In view of the circumstances of the present matter, the Single Judge determined the costs of the current proceeding to the amount of currency of country H 12,000. 16. Consequently, and in line with the aforementioned, the Single Judge decided that the Respondent must pay the amount of currency of country H 12,000 in order to cover the costs of the present proceedings. III. Decision of the Single Judge of the Players´ Status Committee 1. The claim of the Claimant, Club W, is accepted. 2. The Respondent, Club G, has to pay to the Claimant, Club W, the amount of EUR 125,000, as well as 5% interest per annum on the said amount from 16 April 2012 until the date of effective payment, within 30 days as from the date of notification of this decision. 3. If the aforementioned amount 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 currency of country H 12,000 are to be paid by the Respondent, Club G, within 30 days as from the date of notification of the present decision, as follows: 4.1 Currency of country H 4,000 has to be paid to the Claimant, Club W. 4.2 Currency of country H 8,000 has to be paid to FIFA to the following bank account with reference to case nr.: 5. The Claimant, Club W, is directed to inform the Respondent, Club G, directly and immediately of the account number to which the remittance under points 2 and 4.1 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 Markus Kattner Deputy Secretary General Encl. CAS Directives