F.I.F.A. – Commissione per lo Status dei Calciatori (2014-2015) – controversie tra società – ———- F.I.F.A. – Players’ Status Committee (2014-2015) – 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 26 August 2014, by Geoff Thompson (England) Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee, on the claim presented by the club A, country G represented by Mr xxxx as “Claimant” against the club B, country U as “Respondent” regarding a contractual dispute arisen between the parties and relating to the player Z I.

F.I.F.A. - Commissione per lo Status dei Calciatori (2014-2015) – controversie tra società – ---------- F.I.F.A. - Players’ Status Committee (2014-2015) – 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 26 August 2014, by Geoff Thompson (England) Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee, on the claim presented by the club A, country G represented by Mr xxxx as “Claimant” against the club B, country U as “Respondent” regarding a contractual dispute arisen between the parties and relating to the player Z I. Facts of the case 1. On 15 June 2011, the Club A from country G (hereinafter: the Claimant) and the Club B from country U (hereinafter: the Respondent) concluded a transfer agreement (hereinafter: the agreement) for the definitive transfer of the player Z (hereinafter: the player) from the Claimant to the Respondent for a total compensation of EUR 2,200,000, payable in two instalments as follows (cf. article 1.1. of the agreement): - EUR 1,100,000 on 1 July 2011; - EUR 1,100,000 on 1 July 2012. 2. Additionally, the agreement stipulated in article 1.2. that “B [i.e. the Respondent] is obliged to invite the professional team of A [i.e. the Claimant] for training camp activities in xxxx during the winter period of the Liga in country G in December/January 2011/2012 and December/January 2012/2013” and that “in case A - for no matter what reason - does not absolve two training camps until January 31st 2013, A has the right to absolve a training camp under the conditions stipulated above in the winter break period of the season 2013/2014. If until January 31st 2014 – for no matter what reason – A still did not absolve two training camps under the conditions stipulated above, B shall pay another Euro 400,000.-- net to A, due on February 15th 2014”. 3. On 11 October 2013, the Claimant lodged a claim with FIFA against the Respondent for having allegedly failed to respect their contractual obligations. 4. In this respect, the Claimant claimed having only received from the Respondent the first instalment under article 1.1 of the agreement and argued that although it had requested the Respondent several times to proceed with the payment of the second instalment, the latter had failed to pay the outstanding amount agreed upon in the agreement. 5. Consequently, the Claimant requested from the Respondent the total amount of EUR 1,100,000, i.e. EUR 2,200,000 less the EUR 1,100,000 already received, plus interest at the rate of 5% per annum over the aforementioned amount as from 2 July 2012. 6. In spite of having been asked to do so, the Respondent did not provide any position in response to the claim lodged against it. 7. On 19 February 2014, the Claimant amended its claim and requested from the Respondent an additional amount of EUR 400,000 plus 5% interest as of 16 February 2014, based on article 1.2 of the agreement. 8. In this respect, the Claimant explained that as only one training camp had taken place until 31 January 2014, it should also be entitled to receive from the Respondent an additional amount of EUR 400,000. As to that, the Claimant further alleged that although it had requested the Respondent to proceed with the payment of said training camp compensation, the latter had failed to pay said amount. 9. Consequently, the Claimant amended its claim and requested from the Respondent the total amount of EUR 1,500,000, i.e. EUR 1,100,000 as well as EUR 400,000, plus interest at the rate of 5% per annum over the amount of EUR 1,100,000 as from 2 July 2012 as well as over the amount of EUR 400,000 as from 16 February 2014. 10. In its response to the amended claim dated 19 March 2014, the Respondent rejected it and first of all alleged that article 1.2 would only apply “in case A [i.e. the Claimant] does not absolve two training camps (…)”. Based on the aforementioned, the Respondent stated that the Claimant had “attended one training camp in January 2012” and that therefore the “condition for the application and/or enforcement of clause 2 (g) of the Transfer Agreement, i.e. the need for A [i.e. the Claimant] not to have attended any of the two training camps, have clearly not been met”. The Respondent further alleged having paid around EUR 100,000 for the first training camp without providing any evidence in this respect. 11. Finally, the Respondent emphasised that “there is no evidence that A [i.e. the Claimant] ever informed B[i.e. the Respondent] of their wish to travel to xxxx for the said second camp and followed up on the said wish with a formal request to B to make the necessary travel and training arrangements”. 12. On account of the above, the Respondent deemed that the Claimant should not be entitled to any compensation in relation to article 1.2 as claimed in its amended complaint. 13. As to the first part of the claim originally lodged against it, the Respondent did not provide any position in response to it. 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 of the Rules Governing the Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber (edition 2014). Consequently, and since the present matter was submitted to FIFA on 11 October 2013, thus before the aforementioned rules entered into force (1 August 2014), 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 2014 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 2014 and 2012 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 11 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 15 June 2011, according to which the player would be transferred from the Claimant to the Respondent for the amount of EUR 2,200,000, payable in two equal instalments of EUR 1,100,000 each on 1 July 2011 as well as on 1 July 2012 respectively. 5. In continuation, the Single Judge remarked 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 1,100,000 representing the first instalment stipulated in the agreement, whereas the second instalment of EUR 1,100,000 was still outstanding. 6. Furthermore, the Single Judge duly took note that article 1.2 of the agreement expressly mentioned that “B [i.e. the Respondent] is obliged to invite the professional team of A [i.e. the Claimant] for training camp activities in xxxxx during the winter period of the Liga in country G in December/January 2011/2012 and December/January 2012/2013” and that “in case A - for no matter what reason - does not absolve two training camps until January 31st 2013, A has the right to absolve a training camp under the conditions stipulated above in the winter break period of the season 2013/2014. If until January 31st 2014 – for no matter what reason – A still did not absolve two training camps under the conditions stipulated above, B shall pay another Euro 400,000.-- net to A, due on February 15th 2014”. 7. In this regard, the Single Judge observed that the Claimant had amended its complaint and requested the payment of this additional amount of EUR 400,000 in accordance with article 1.2 of the agreement. 8. In continuation, the Single Judge observed that the Respondent had not submitted any comments with regard to the non-payment of the second instalment provided in the agreement for the transfer of the player to the Respondent, whereas it had rejected to pay the additional amount of EUR 400,000 stipulated in article 1.2 of the agreement alleging that the condition for the payment of such sum has not been met. 9. With regard to the additional compensation amounting to EUR 400,000 provided in article 1.2 of the agreement, the Single Judge carefully studied the documentation submitted, in particular the agreement concluded between the Claimant and the Respondent, in order to interpret the meaning of the wording of article 1.2 of the agreement and to establish whether the payment of EUR 400,000 was due by the Respondent to the Claimant. 10. While analyzing the content of article 1.2 of the agreement, the Single Judge was keen on noting that the Claimant would be entitled to receive a compensation of EUR 400,000 if the Claimant would not take part in two training camps in xxxx during the winter period of the country G championship until 31 January 2014 at the latest. Therefore, the Singe Judge remarked that article 1.2 of the agreement stipulated a payment obligation of EUR 400,000 from the Respondent to the Claimant subject to the condition that the Claimant did not take part in two training camps in xxxxx during the winter period of the country G championship until 31 January 2014 at the latest. 11. Having established the above, the Single Judge acknowledged that, according to the allegations of the Claimant and the Respondent, it was undisputed that only one training camp had taken place in January 2012. 12. As a consequence, the Single Judge came to the conclusion that the condition for the payment obligation under article 1.2 of the agreement was met since the Claimant only took part in one training camp and, therefore, that the Claimant is entitled to receive the additional compensation of EUR 400,000. 13. With regard to the outstanding transfer compensation which had to be paid by the Respondent for the transfer of the player, the Single Judge, 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, 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. 14. Therefore and taking into account that the Claimant had acknowledged the receipt of a total amount of EUR 1,100,000 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 1,100,000 was still outstanding and should therefore be paid by the Respondent to the Claimant. 15. In view of all of the above, the Single Judge concluded that the Claimant’s complaint against the Respondent is accepted and that, consequently, the Respondent has to pay to the Claimant the total amount of EUR 1,500,000, together with an interest at a rate of 5% per year on the respective amounts, i.e. 5% p.a. over the amount of EUR 1,100,000 as from 2 July 2012 until the date of effective payment as well as 5% p.a. over the amount of EUR 400,000 as from 16 February 2014 until the date of effective payment. 16. 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 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 and are normally to be paid by the unsuccessful party. 17. In respect of the above and taking into account that the responsibility of the failure to comply with the fully payment of the transfer compensation 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. 18. 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 CHF 200,000. Consequently, the Single Judge concluded that the maximum amount of costs of the proceedings corresponds to CHF 25,000. 19. 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 CHF 20,000. 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, A, is accepted. 2. The Respondent, B, has to pay to the Claimant, within 30 days as from the date of notification of this decision, the amount of EUR 1,500,000, plus interest as follows: - 5% p.a. over the amount of EUR 1,100,000 as from 2 July 2012 until the date of effective payment; - 5% p.a. over the amount of EUR 400,000 as from 16 February 2014 until the date of effective payment. 3. If 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 20,000 are to be paid by the Respondent,within 30 days as from the date of notification of the present decision as follows: 4.1. The amount of CHF 15,000 has to be paid to FIFA to the following bank account with reference to case nr.: UBS Zurich Account number 366.677.01U (FIFA Players’ Status) Clearing number 230 IBAN: CH27 0023 0230 3666 7701U SWIFT: UBSWCHZH80A 4.2. The amount of CHF 5,000 has to be paid directly to the Claimant. 5. The Claimant is directed to inform the Respondent, Al Ahli Club, immediately and directly of the account number to which the remittances under points 2. and 4.2. above are to be made and to notify the Single Judge of 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