F.I.F.A. – Players’ Status Committee / Commissione per lo Status dei Calciatori – club vs club disputes / controversie tra società – (2016-2017) – fifa.com – atto non ufficiale – Decision 28 September 2016

Decision of the Single Judge

of the Players’ Status Committee

passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 28 September 2016,

by

Geoff Thompson (England)

Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee,

on the claim presented by the club,

Club A, Country B

as Claimant

against the club,

Club C, Country D

as Respondent

regarding a contractual dispute between the parties

relating to the Player E.

I. Facts of the case

1. On an unknown date, the Club of Country B Club A (hereinafter: the Claimant) and the Club of Country D Club C (hereinafter: the Respondent) signed a “transfer convention” (hereinafter: the contract) for the transfer of Player E (hereinafter: the player) from the Claimant to the Respondent.

2. According to the contract, the Respondent undertook to pay to the Claimant “the sum of EUR 60,000, and EUR 15,000 during three next months upon the player´s transfer“.

3. On 25 June 2015, the Claimant lodged a claim with FIFA against the Respondent requesting the payment of the second instalment amounting to EUR 15,000. In this respect, the Claimant alleged that the Respondent, after having paid the first instalment of EUR 60,000, had subsequently failed to pay the second instalment amounting to EUR 15,000. The Claimant further explained to have requested the Respondent several times to proceed with the payment by means of several correspondences without receiving any reply from the Respondent.

4. In its reply, the Respondent argued that it had proceed to the payment of the requested amount and provided as evidence a letter dated 17 August 2016 addressed to its bank in Country D requesting the payment. However, the Claimant maintained to have never received such payment.

***

II. Considerations of the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee

1. First of all, the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee (hereinafter: the Single Judge) analysed which edition of the Rules Governing the Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: Procedural Rules) were applicable to the matter at hand. In this respect, he referred to art. 21 of the Procedural Rules as well as to the fact that the present matter was submitted to FIFA on 25 June 2015. Therefore, the Single Judge concluded that the 2015 edition of the Procedural Rules is applicable to the matter at hand.

Player E

2. Subsequently, the Single Judge analysed which edition of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players is 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 Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players and, on the other hand, once again to the fact that the claim was lodged in front of FIFA on 25 June 2015. In view of the foregoing, the Single Judge concluded that the 2015 edition of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (hereinafter: the Regulations) is applicable to the case at hand.

3. Furthermore, the Single Judge confirmed that, on the basis of art. 3 par. 1 and par. 2 of the Procedural Rules in connection with art. 23 par. 1 and par. 3 as well as art. 22 lit. f) of the Regulations, he was competent to deal with the present matter since it concerned a dispute between clubs affiliated to two different associations.

4. The competence of the Single Judge and the applicable regulations having been established, and entering into the substance of the matter, the Single Judge started by acknowledging the above-mentioned facts as well as the arguments and the documentation submitted by the parties. However, the Single 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. In this respect, the Single Judge noted that on an unspecified date, the parties had signed a contract for the transfer of the player from the Claimant to the Respondent for the amount of “EUR 60,000 and EUR 15,000, during the next three months upon the player´s transfer”. In this regard, the Single Judge noticed that according to the information contained in the Transfer Matching System (TMS), the player was registered with the Respondent on 14 January 2015.

6. Having established the aforementioned, the Single Judge took note that the Claimant maintained that the Respondent, after having paid the first instalment of EUR 60,000, had subsequently failed to pay the second instalment in the amount of EUR 15,000, in accordance with the contract.

7. In continuation, the Single Judge observed that, in its reply, the Respondent argued to have made the relevant payment to the Claimant, by ordering its Bank in Country D to proceed with the relevant payment.

8. Having analysed the argumentation and documentation put forward by the parties in the present matter, the Single Judge first concluded that it remained undisputed by the Respondent that it still owed the Claimant the amount of EUR 15,000. In this respect, and in accordance with art. 12 par. 3 of the Procedural Rules which stipulates that any party claiming a right on the basis of an alleged fact shall carry the burden of proof, the Single Judge considered that the letter provided by the Respondent addressed to its bank in Country D requesting the latter to proceed with the relevant requested payment does not constitute enough evidence in support of the Claimant´s allegation. In other words, the Respondent had not been able to prove to have effectively transferred the requested sum to the Claimant.

9. Consequently, the Single Judge decided to reject the argumentation put forward by the Respondent in its defence and determined that, in accordance with the basic legal principle of pacta sunt servanda, which in essence means that agreements must be respected by the parties in good faith, the Respondent has to pay the Claimant the aforementioned amount of EUR 15,000.

10. Lastly, 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 (cf. art. 18 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules).

11. In respect of the above, and taking into account that the Claimant’s claim is accepted, the Single Judge concluded that the Respondent has to bear the costs of the current proceedings before FIFA.

12. 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 EUR 15,000. Consequently, the Single Judge concluded that the maximum amount of costs of the proceedings corresponds to CHF 5,000.

13. In conclusion, and considering the particularities of the present matter, the Single Judge determined the costs of the current proceedings to the amount of CHF 4,000. Furthermore, and in line with his aforementioned considerations and taking into account the degree of success, the Single Judge decided that the amount of CHF 4,000 has to be paid by the Respondent.

III. Decision of the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee

1. The claim of the Claimant, Club A, is accepted.

2. The Respondent, Club C, has to pay to the Claimant, Club A, within 30 days as from the date of notification of this decision, the amount of EUR 15,000.

3. If the aforementioned amount is not paid within the aforementioned deadline, an interest rate of 5% per year will apply as of the expiry of the fixed time limit and 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 4,000 are to be paid by the Respondent, Club C, within 30 days as from the date of notification of this decision, as follows:

4.1 The amount of CHF 3,000 has to be paid 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

4.2 The amount of CHF 1,000 has to be paid directly to the Claimant, Club A.

5. The Claimant, Club A, is directed to inform the Respondent, Club C, 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 Players’ Status Committee of every payment received.

*****

Note relating to the motivated decision (legal remedy):

According to article 58 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

For the Single Judge of the

Players’ Status Committee

Marco Villiger

Deputy Secretary General

Encl. CAS Directives