F.I.F.A. – Camera di Risoluzione delle Controversie (2015-2016) – contributo di solidarietà – ———- F.I.F.A. – Dispute Resolution Chamber (2015-2016) – solidarity contribution – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) judge passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 2 September 2015, by Philippe Diallo (France), 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 a solidarity contribution dispute related to the the international transfer of the Player E

F.I.F.A. - Camera di Risoluzione delle Controversie (2015-2016) - contributo di solidarietà – ---------- F.I.F.A. - Dispute Resolution Chamber (2015-2016) - solidarity contribution – official version by www.fifa.com - Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) judge passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 2 September 2015, by Philippe Diallo (France), 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 a solidarity contribution dispute related to the the international transfer of the Player E I. Facts of the case 1. The Football Federation of Country B confirmed that the Player E (hereinafter: the player), born on 7 December 1983, was registered with its affiliated club, Club A (hereinafter: the Claimant), as from 26 May 2006 until 5 August 2006. 2. The Football Federation of Country B also confirmed that the sporting season in Country B follows the calendar year, running from 1 January until 31 December of each year. 3. The Football Federation of Country D confirmed that the player was registered with its affiliated club, Club C (hereinafter: the Respondent) on 7 January 2012. 4. According to the information and documentation entered in the Transfer Matching System (TMS), the Club of Country F, Club G, and the Respondent, agreed upon a transfer compensation for the player amounting to EUR 375,000 payable in three equal installments of EUR 125,000 each due, respectively, on 5 January, 15 February and 15 March 2012. Furthermore, the parties agreed that “%15 of the players’ next transfer from our club [Club C] will be paid to Club G“. 5. On 18 December 2012, the Claimant contacted FIFA claiming its proportion of the solidarity contribution in connection with the transfer of the player concerned from the involved club to the Respondent. In particular, the Claimant requested 0.1% of the transfer compensation, plus 5% interest p.a. 6. In reaction to the Claimant’s claim, the Respondent requested the claim to be rejected, as “In other news, club, Player E 31.01.2013 grounds of breach of the obligations of the agreement on the current “AS IS RIGHT UNILATERAL TERMINATION” was. Thus, no contractual link between the football club with the left”. II. Considerations of the DRC judge 1. First of all, the DRC judge analysed whether he was competent to deal with the matter at hand. In this respect, he took note that the present matter was submitted to FIFA on 18 December 2012. Consequently, the 2012 edition of the Rules governing the procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: 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 par. 3 of the Procedural Rules and confirmed that, in accordance with art. 24 par. 1 in combination with art. 22 d) of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (editions 2012, 2014 and 2015) he is competent to decide on the present litigation relating to the solidarity mechanism. 3. In particular, and in accordance with art. 24 par. 2 lit. i) of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players, the DRC judge confirmed that he may adjudicate in the present dispute, the value of which does not exceed CHF 100,000. 4. Furthermore, the DRC judge analysed which edition of the 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 2012, 2014 and 2015), and considering that the present claim was lodged on 18 December 2012, the 2012 edition of said regulations (hereinafter: Regulations) is applicable to the matter at hand as to the substance. 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 doing so, he started by acknowledging the above-mentioned facts of the case as well as the documents contained in the file. 6. However, the DRC judge emphasised that in the following considerations he will refer only to the facts, arguments and documentary evidence which he considered pertinent for the assessment of the matter at hand. 7. In this respect and entering into the substance of the matter, the DRC judge started by acknowledging that the Claimant is requesting 0.1% of the total transfer amount paid by the Respondent to the Club of Country F, Club G, plus 5% interest p.a. 8. In addition to the above, 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 of EUR 375,000, payable in three equal instalments of EUR 125,000 each due, respectively, on 5 January, 15 February and 15 March 2012. 9. Furthermore, the DRC judge noted that the Respondent deems that the Claimant is not entitled to receive any solidarity contribution arguing that the player unilaterally terminated the contract with it and therefore “no contractual link between the football club with the left”. 10. Having established the above, 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. 11. In this respect, the DRC judge recalled that the Football Federation of Country B had confirmed that the player, born on 7 December 1983, was registered with the Claimant as from 26 May 2006 until 5 August 2006. 12. Moreover, and in relation to the argument put forward by the Respondent, the DRC judge emphasised that solidarity contribution is due even though the relation between the club and the player has ended. Therefore the DRC judge decided to reject the Respondent’s argumentation. 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 26 May 2006 until 5 August 2006, i.e. for 2 months of the season of the player’s 23rd birthday. In terms of the percentage of the 5% solidarity contribution, the DRC judge calculated that, on a pro rata basis, this corresponds to 1.66% of 5%. However, the DRC judge noted that the Claimant claimed 0.1% of the total transfer fee, i.e. more than it is entitled to. 14. In view of all of the above, the DRC judge decided to partially accept the claim of the Claimant and held that the Respondent is liable to pay the amount of EUR 311 to the Claimant as solidarity contribution in relation to the transfer of the player from Club G to the Respondent. 15. Furthermore, and taking into consideration both the claim of the Claimant as well as art. 2 par. 1 of Annexe 5 of the Regulations, the DRC judge decided that the Respondent has to pay, in conformity with the longstanding practice of the DRC, interest at rate of 5% p.a. as from the date of claim, i.e. 18 December 2012 until the date of effective payment. 16. Lastly, the DRC judge referred to art. 18 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules, according to which, in proceedings before the DRC, including the DRC judge relating to disputes regarding training compensation and the solidarity mechanism, costs in the maximum amount of CHF 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 (cf. art. 18 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules). 17. In respect of the above, and taking into account that the claim of the Claimant has been partially accepted, the DRC judge concluded that the Respondent has to bear the costs of the current proceedings in front of FIFA. 18. According to Annex A of the Procedural Rules, the costs of the proceedings are to be levied on the basis of the amount in dispute. 19. On that basis, the DRC judge held that the amount to be taken into consideration in the present proceedings is EUR 375 related to the claim of the Claimant. Consequently, the DRC judge concluded that the maximum amount of costs of the proceedings corresponds to CHF 5,000 (cf. table in Annexe A). 20. In view of all of the above, the DRC judge concluded that the amount of CHF 5,000 has to be paid by the Respondent to cover the costs of the present proceedings. ***** III. Decision of the DRC judge 1. The claim of the Claimant, Club A, is partially accepted. 2. The Respondent, Club C, has to pay to the Claimant, within 30 days as of the date of notification of the present decision, the amount of EUR 311, plus 5% interest p.a. on said amount as of 18 December 2012 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 of the Claimant is rejected. 5. 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: Markus Kattner Acting Secretary General Encl. CAS directives