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 7 May 2014, by Geoff Thompson (England) Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee, on the claim presented by the club Club C, from country U as “Claimant” against the club Club P, from country I as “Respondent” regarding a contractual dispute arisen between the parties and relating to the player S.

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 7 May 2014, by Geoff Thompson (England) Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee, on the claim presented by the club Club C, from country U as “Claimant” against the club Club P, from country I as “Respondent” regarding a contractual dispute arisen between the parties and relating to the player S. I. Facts of the case 1. On 16 May 2012, Club C, from country U (hereinafter: the Claimant) and Club P, from country I (hereinafter: the Respondent) concluded a transfer agreement (hereinafter: the agreement) for the definitive transfer of the player S (hereinafter: the player) from the Claimant to the Respondent for a total compensation of EUR 1,800,000, payable in three instalments as follows: - EUR 360,000 “within seven days after the signature of the present agreement”; - EUR 640,000 “within seven days after receiving the ITC by Club P [i.e. the Respondent] but not later than 31 August 2012”; - EUR 800,000 before 15 January 2013. 2. On 28 August 2012, the parties slightly amended the payment terms of the agreement and agreed in writing that the amount of EUR 1,800,000 should be paid by the Respondent to the Claimant as follows: - EUR 360,000 “within seven days after the signature of the present agreement”; - EUR 640,000 “within seven days after receiving the ITC by Club P [i.e. the Respondent] but not later than 31 August 2012”; - EUR 400,000 before 31 January 2013; - EUR 400,000 before 31 July 2013. 3. On 7 October 2013, the Claimant lodged a claim with FIFA against the Respondent for having allegedly failed to respect their contractual obligations. In this respect, the Claimant alleged that the Respondent, after having paid the amount of EUR 360,000 on 24 May 2012 and the amount of EUR 320,000 on 31 October 2012, had subsequently failed to pay the remaining amount agreed upon in the agreement. The Claimant further explained that it had on several occasions tried to contact and ask the Respondent to comply with its contractual obligations to the full but apparently to no avail. 4. Consequently, the Claimant requested from the Respondent the remaining amount of EUR 1,120,000 (i.e. EUR 1,800,000 less the EUR 680,000 already received), plus interest at the rate of 5% per annum as from 31 August 2012. 5. In spite of having been asked to do so, the Respondent never responded to the claim lodged against it, although it was informed that, in absence of a reply, a decision would be taken on the basis of the information and evidence at disposal. 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 referred to as: the Single Judge) analysed whether he was competent to deal with the matter in hand. In this respect, he 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). Consequently, and since the present matter was submitted to FIFA on 7 October 2013, thus after the aforementioned rules entered into force (1 December 2012), the Single Judge concluded that the 2012 edition of the Rules Governing the Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: the Procedural Rules) was applicable to the matter in hand. 2. Furthermore, the Single Judge confirmed that, on the basis of art. 3 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules in connection with art. 23 par. 1 and 3 as well as art. 22 f) of the 2012 edition of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players, he was competent to deal with the present matter since it concerned a dispute between two clubs affiliated to different associations. 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 claim was lodged in front of FIFA on 7 October 2013. In view of the foregoing, the Single Judge concluded that the 2012 edition of the FIFA Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players (hereinafter: the Regulations) is applicable to the matter as to the substance. 4. 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 above-mentioned facts of the case as well as the documents contained in the file. In this respect, the Single Judge noted that the parties had signed a transfer agreement on 16 May 2012, according to which the player would be transferred from the Claimant to the Respondent for the amount of EUR 1,800,000, payable in three different instalments and that on 28 August 2012, the parties had slightly amended the payment terms by having agreed four different instalments. 5. In continuation, the Single Judge noted that, based on the information received from the Claimant during the course of the present investigation, the Respondent had only paid the total amount of EUR 680,000, representing the first and part of the second instalment stipulated in the agreement. 6. Furthermore, the Single Judge also remarked that the Respondent had not submitted any comments in response to the claim lodged against it by the Claimant. Consequently, the Single Judge deemed that, by acting in this way, the Respondent had renounced to its right of defence and it had therefore to be assumed that the Respondent had accepted the allegations of the Claimant. 7. In view of the above and in accordance with the general principle of pacta sunt servanda, which in essence means that agreements must be respected by the parties in good faith, the Single Judge decided that the Respondent must fulfil the obligation it voluntarily entered into with the Claimant by means of the agreement signed between the parties, and therefore, the Respondent must pay to the Claimant the outstanding transfer compensation agreed upon for the transfer of the player from the Claimant to the Respondent. 8. Therefore and taking into account that the Claimant had acknowledged the receipt of a total amount of EUR 680,000 from the Respondent and that the latter had not denied owing the remaining amount to the Claimant, the Single Judge concluded that the remaining sum amounting to EUR 1,120,000 was still outstanding (i.e. EUR 1,800,000 – EUR 680,000) and should therefore be paid by the Respondent to the Claimant. 9. Additionally and with respect to the claimed default interest as from 31 August 2012, the Single Judge recalled that no interest appears to have been contractually agreed between the parties. Therefore and also taking into account the Claimant’s request in this regard, the Single Judge decided, in accordance with the long standing and well-established jurisprudence of the Players’ Status Committee concerning the payment of interest, that the Claimant should receive from the Respondent an interest rate of 5% per year as from the day after the due date of each instalment due. As a result, the Single Judge concluded that the Respondent has to pay to the Claimant 5% interest per year as follows: - on EUR 320,000, as from 1 September 2012; - on EUR 400,000, as from 31 January 2013; - on EUR 400,000, as from 31 July 2013. 10. In view of all of the above, the Single Judge concluded that the Claimant’s claim against the Respondent is partially accepted and that, consequently, the Respondent has to pay to the Claimant the total amount of EUR 1,120,000, together with an interest at a rate of 5% per year on the respective amounts as established above. 11. 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 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 relevant provision further states that 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. 12. In respect of the above and taking into account that the responsibility of the failure to comply with the fully payment of the transfer fee can entirely be attributed to the Respondent and that the claim of the Claimant has been almost fully accepted, the Single Judge concluded that the Respondent has to bear the costs of the current proceedings before FIFA. 13. 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 over currency of country H 200,000. Consequently, the Single Judge concluded that the maximum amount of costs of the proceedings corresponds to currency of country H 25,000. 14. 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 25,000. Consequently, and in line with the aforementioned considerations, the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee decided that said amount has to be paid by the Respondent 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 C, is partially accepted. 2. The Respondent, Club P, has to pay to the Claimant, Club C, the amount of EUR 1,120,000 as outstanding transfer compensation, within 30 days as from the date of notification of this decision. 3. Within the same time limit, the Respondent, Club P, has to pay to the Claimant, Club C, default interest at a rate of 5% per year on the following partial amounts, as follows: - On EUR 320,000 from 1 September 2012 until the effective date of payment; - On EUR 400,000 from 31 January 2013 until the effective date of payment; - On EUR 400,000 from 31 July 2013 until the effective date of payment. 4. Any further claims lodged by the Claimant, Club C, are rejected. 5. If the aforementioned amount of EUR 1,120,000, plus interest as established above, 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. 6. The final costs of the proceedings in the amount of currency of country H 25,000 are to be paid by the Respondent, Club P, within 30 days as from the date of notification of the present decision, as follows: 6.1 The amount of currency of country H 20,000 has to be paid to FIFA to the following bank account with reference to case nr. : 6.2 The amount of currency of country H 5,000 has to be paid directly to the Claimant, Club C. 7. The Claimant, Club C, is directed to inform the Respondent, Club P, immediately and directly of the account number to which the remittance under points 2, 3 and 6.2 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 article 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