F.I.F.A. – Camera di Risoluzione delle Controversie (2014-2015) – contributo di solidarietà – ———- F.I.F.A. – Dispute Resolution Chamber (2014-2015) – solidarity contribution – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) judge passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 17 March 2015, by Theo van Seggelen (Netherlands), DRC judge, on the claim presented by the club, Club A, Country B, as Claimant against the club, Club C, Country D as Respondent regarding solidarity contribution in connection with the transfer of the Player E

F.I.F.A. - Camera di Risoluzione delle Controversie (2014-2015) - contributo di solidarietà – ---------- F.I.F.A. - Dispute Resolution Chamber (2014-2015) - solidarity contribution – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) judge passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 17 March 2015, by Theo van Seggelen (Netherlands), DRC judge, on the claim presented by the club, Club A, Country B, as Claimant against the club, Club C, Country D as Respondent regarding solidarity contribution in connection with the transfer of the Player E I. Facts of the case 1. According to the player passport issued by the Football Association of Country B, the Player E (hereinafter: the player), born on 20 April 1991, was registered with its affiliated club, Club A (hereinafter: the Claimant) as of 21 March 2002 until 18 December 2008 as an amateur and as of 19 December 2008 until 14 August 2013 as a professional. 2. The relevant sporting seasons in Country B ran as follows: - for amateurs (under the age of 20) from January to December of the relevant year; - for amateurs (over the age of 20) and professionals from 1 July until 30 June of the following year. 3. According to the information contained in the Transfer Matching System (TMS), the player was registered with the Club of Country D, Club C (hereinafter: the Respondent), on 2 September 2013. 4. On 6 September 2013, the Claimant contacted FIFA asking for their proportion of the solidarity contribution derived from the transfer of the player concerned from the Club of Country F, Club G, to the Respondent. In particular, the Claimant claimed that it is entitled to 4.5% of the total transfer compensation but requested 49,900, plus interest. 5. According to the information contained in TMS, on 7 August 2013, Club G and the Respondent agreed upon a transfer compensation amounting to USD 1,700,000 payable as follows: o USD 1,100,000 on 21 August 2013; o USD 300,000 on 1 December 2013; o USD 300,000 on 30 March 2014. 6. In its reply, the Respondent explained that it was willing to pay an amount of USD 21,250. 7. On 21 November 2014, the Claimant acknowledged receipt of a payment of USD 21,250. In this regard, the Claimant asserts that since it is entitled to 4.5% of the total transfer compensation, i.e. USD 76,500, an amount of USD 55,250 is still due; however, the Claimant emphasises that its claim is limited to 49,900 and consequently claims this amount. 8. After the closure of the investigation, the Respondent requested FIFA to involve Club G in the procedure and condemn the latter to reimburse it the amount due as solidarity contribution, i.e. USD 85,000, or alternatively, USD 76,500 corresponding to the 4.5% claimed by the Claimant. In support of its request, the Respondent stresses on art. 5 of the Loan Agreement which stipulates that “the above mentioned amounts constitute the entire rights for Club G and the Player, and include all expenses, costs, compensation may be demanded by any third parties”. II. Considerations of the DRC judge 1. First of all, 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 6 September 2013. Consequently, the 2012 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 of the Procedural Rules). 2. Subsequently, the DRC judge referred to art. 3 par. 2 and 3 of the Procedural Rules and confirmed that in accordance with art. 24 par. 1 and 2 in conjunction with art. 22 lit. d) of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2015), he is competent to decide on the present matter, which concerns a dispute relating to the solidarity mechanism between clubs belonging to different associations. 3. Furthermore, the DRC 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, the DRC judge referred, on the one hand, to art. 26 par. 1 and 2 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2015) and, on the other hand, to the fact that the present claim was lodged on 6 September 2013 and that the player was registered with the Respondent on 2 September 2013. In view of the aforementioned, the DRC judge confirmed that the 2012 edition of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (hereinafter: Regulations) is applicable to the matter at hand as to the substance. 4. In continuation, the DRC judge observed that the Respondent submitted a correspondence after the investigation-phase of the matter had already been concluded. As a result, the DRC judge decided not to take into account the last submission of the Respondent and established that in accordance with art 9 par. 3 of the Procedural Rules, he shall take a decision upon the basis of those documents on file that were provided prior to the closure of the investigation-phase. 5. The competence of the DRC judge and the applicable regulations having been established, the DRC judge entered into the substance of the matter. In this respect, he started by acknowledging all the above-mentioned facts as well as the arguments and the documentation submitted by the parties. However, the DRC judge emphasised that in the following considerations he will refer only to the facts, arguments and documentary evidence, which it considered pertinent for the assessment of the matter at hand. 6. In continuation, the DRC judge referred to art. 21 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 between the seasons of his 12th and 23rd birthday. 7. In this respect, and referring to art. 6 par. 3 of Annexe 3 of the Regulations, the DRC judge took into account that according to the information contained in the TMS, Club G and the Respondent agreed upon a transfer compensation amounting to USD 1,700,000 payable as follows: o USD 1,100,000 on 21 August 2013; o USD 300,000 on 1 December 2013; o USD 300,000 on 30 March 2014. 8. In addition to the above, the DRC judge recalled that the Football Association of Country B had confirmed that the player, born on 20 April 1991, was registered with the Claimant as of 21 March 2002 until 18 December 2008 as an amateur and as of 19 December 2008 until 14 August 2013 as a professional. 9. Moreover, the DRC judge noted that the Claimant acknowledged having received an amount of USD 21,250 from the Respondent. 10. In continuation, the DRC judge took note that the Claimant asserted that it was entitled to receive 4,5% of the total transfer compensation, i.e. USD 76,500, but limited its claim to 49,900. 11. 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 21 March 2002 until 18 December 2008. 12. Therefore, considering the payment of USD 21,250 and after referring to the Claimant’s claim as well as to the principle of non ultra petita, the DRC judge decided that the Respondent has to pay to the Claimant as solidarity contribution the claimed amount of 49,900 plus 5% interest p.a. on said amount as from 21 November 2014 until the date of effective payment. 13. In continuation, the deciding authority 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 Dispute Resolution Chamber, including the DRC judge, relating to disputes regarding solidarity mechanism 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. 14. In this respect, the DRC judge reiterated that the claim of the Claimant is accepted and established that the Respondent has to bear the costs of the current proceedings in front of FIFA. 15. 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. 16. The amount in dispute to be taken into consideration in the present proceedings amounts to 49,900 related to the claim of the Claimant. Therefore, the DRC judge concluded that the maximum amount of costs of the proceedings corresponds to CHF 5,000 (cf. table in Annexe A). 17. As a result, and taking into account the particularities of the present matter, the complexity of the case as well as the degree of success, the DRC judge determined the costs of the current proceedings to the amount of CHF 5,000, which shall be borne by the Respondent. III. Decision of the DRC judge 1. The claim of the Claimant, Club A, is accepted. 2. The Respondent, Club C, has to pay to the Claimant, within 30 days as from the date of notification of this decision, the amount of 49,900 plus 5% interest p.a. on said amount as from 21 November 2014 until the date of effective payment. 3. In the event that the amount plus interest due to the Claimant in accordance with the above-mentioned point 2 is not paid by the Respondent within the stated time limit, the present matter shall be submitted, upon request, to the FIFA Disciplinary Committee for consideration and a formal decision. 4. The final costs of the proceedings in the amount of CHF 5,000 are to be paid by the Respondent within 30 days of notification of the present decision, to FIFA to the following bank account: UBS Zurich Account number 366.677.01U (FIFA Players’ Status) Clearing number 230 IBAN: CH27 0023 0230 3666 7701U SWIFT: UBSWCHZH80A 6. The Claimant is directed to inform the Respondent immediately and directly of the account number to which the remittance 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