F.I.F.A. – Camera di Risoluzione delle Controversie (2015-2016) – indennità di formazione – ———-F.I.F.A. – Dispute Resolution Chamber (2015-2016) – training compensation – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) judge passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 26 November 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 training compensation in connection with the Player E I.

F.I.F.A. - Camera di Risoluzione delle Controversie (2015-2016) - indennità di formazione – ----------F.I.F.A. - Dispute Resolution Chamber (2015-2016) - training compensation – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) judge passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 26 November 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 training compensation in connection with the Player E I. Facts of the case 1. According to the player passport issued by the Football Association of country B, the player, Player E (hereinafter; the player), born on 24 November 1994, was registered with its affiliate, Club A (hereinafter; the Claimant) as of 16 March 2007 until 15 March 2010 as an amateur. Moreover, said player passport provided that the player was registered with the club from country B, Club F as of 16 March 2010 until 9 September 2013 also as an amateur. 2. The sporting season in country B runs as follows: a) for amateurs (under 20 years of age) from January to December of the relevant year and b) for amateurs (more than 20 years of age) and professionals from 1 July until 30 June of the following year. 3. According to an official confirmation issued by the Football Federation of country D, the player was registered with its affiliate, Club C (hereinafter; the Respondent) on 2 October 2013 as a professional. 4. Likewise, according to the information contained in the Transfer Matching System (TMS), the Respondent belonged to the category II (UEFA indicative amount of EUR 60,000 per year) at the moment the player was registered with it. 5. In this framework, on 23 September 2014, the Claimant contacted FIFA claiming its proportion of training compensation on the ground of the first registration of the player as a professional before the end of the season of his 23rd birthday. In particular, the Claimant requested, after amending its initial claim, the amount of EUR 38,220 plus interests. 6. Despite having been asked to do so, the Respondent did not reply to the claim. 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 23 September 2014. Consequently, the Rules Governing the Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber (edition 2014; hereinafter; the Procedural Rules) are 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 and par. 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 training compensation 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 par. 2 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2015), and considering that the player was registered with the Respondent on 2 October 2013, the 2012 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. In this respect, the DRC judge 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 he considered pertinent for the assessment of the matter at hand. 5. First, the DRC judge took note that the player, born on 24 November 1994, was, according to the player passport provided by the Football Association of country B, registered with the Claimant as from 16 March 2007 until 15 March 2010 as an amateur. 6. In addition, the DRC judge recalled that the player was registered as a professional with the Respondent on 2 October 2013 and that the player had previously always been registered as an amateur. 7. Furthermore, the DRC judge duly noted that, on the one hand, the Claimant asserted that it is entitled to receive training compensation from the Respondent in the amount of EUR 38,220 as the player was registered for the first time as professional with the Respondent before the end of the season of his 23rd birthday. On the other hand, the DRC judge took into account that the Respondent failed to present its response to the claim, in spite of having been invited to do so. In this way, the DRC judge considered that the Respondent renounced its right to defense and, thus, accepted the allegations of the Claimant. 8. Furthermore, as a consequence of the aforementioned consideration, the DRC judge concurred 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, in other words, upon the statements and documents presented by the Claimant. 9. Bearing in mind the previous considerations, the DRC judge stated that, as established in art. 20 of the Regulations as well as in art. 1 par. 1 in combination with art. 2 par. 1 lit. i) of Annexe 4 of the Regulations, training compensation is payable, as a general rule, for training incurred between the ages of 12 and 21 when a player is registered for the first time as a professional before the end of the season of his 23rd birthday. 10. In view of the foregoing, the DRC judge concluded that based on the documents at disposal it can be established that the player was registered for the first time as a professional with the Respondent before the end of the season of his 23rd birthday and hence, the Claimant is entitled to receive training compensation from the Respondent. 11. Turning his attention to the calculation of the training compensation payable by the Respondent to the Claimant, the DRC judge referred to art. 5 par. 1 and par. 2 of Annexe 4 of the Regulations, which stipulate that, as a general rule, to calculate the training compensation due to a player’s former club, it is necessary to take the costs that would have been incurred by the new club if it had trained the player itself. Furthermore, the DRC judge referred to art. 5 par. 3 of Annexe 4 of the Regulations, which, inter alia, stipulates that to ensure that training compensation for very young players is not set at unreasonably high levels, the training costs for players for the seasons between their 12th and 15th birthday shall be based on the training and education costs for category 4 clubs. 12. In continuation, the DRC judge took into account that the Respondent belonged to the category II within UEFA, which corresponds to the amount of EUR 60,000 per year, and that, as described above, the player, born on 24 November 1994, was registered with the Claimant during 10 months of the season of his 13th birthday, the complete seasons of his 14th and 15th birthday as well as during 3 months of the season of his 16th birthday. 13. On account of the above, and considering the claim of the Claimant, the DRC judge decided that the Respondent has to pay to the Claimant the amount of EUR 38,220 as training compensation. 14. In addition, taking into consideration the Claimant’s claim, the DRC judge decided to award the Claimant interest at the rate of 5% p.a. as from 23 September 2014 until the date of effective payment. 15. Lastly, the DRC 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 Dispute Resolution Chamber relating to disputes regarding training compensation, costs in the maximum amount of CHF 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 that, in accordance with Annex 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 38,220 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 Annex A). 17. As a result, considering that the claim of the Claimant is accepted and the fact that the Respondent failed to reply to the claim, the DRC judge determined the costs of the current proceedings to the amount of CHF 5,000 to be borne by the Respondent in its entirety. 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 EUR 38,220 plus 5% interest p.a. as of 23 September 2014 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. The final costs of the proceedings in the amount of CHF 5,000 are to be paid, within 30 days as from the date of notification of the present decision, by the Respondent to FIFA to the following bank account with reference to case no. xxxxxxxx: UBS Zurich Account number 366.677.01U (FIFA Players’ Status) Clearing number 230 IBAN: CH 27 0023 0230 3666 7701U SWIFT: UBSWCHZH80A 5. 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 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 DRC judge: Markus Kattner Acting Secretary General Training compensation in connection with the Player E Page 7 of 7 (Club A, country B / Club C, country D) Encl. CAS directives