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 22 November 2016

Decision

of the Single Judge

of the Players’ Status Committee

passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 22 November 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

Player E

I. Facts of the case

1. On 30 June 2015, the Club of Country B, Club A (hereinafter: the Claimant), and the Club of Country D, Club C (hereinafter: the Respondent), signed a transfer agreement according to which the Respondent agreed to pay the Claimant the amount of EUR 3,500,000 – for the permanent transfer of the Player of Country F, Player E (hereinafter: the player) – in four equal instalments of EUR 875,000, respectively due on 30 August 2015, 30 November 2015, 29 February 2016 and 30 June 2016.

2. On 31 March 2016, the Claimant put the Respondent in default of payment of the third instalment, granting the latter a deadline of ten days to remedy the default.

3. On 28 April 2016, the Claimant lodged a complaint before FIFA against the Respondent, explaining that the latter had still not paid the third instalment of the transfer compensation agreed for the permanent transfer of the player, which fell due on 29 February 2016.

4. Moreover, the Claimant explained that the player was registered with it 324 days for the season 2014-2015 and 60 days for the season 2015-2016, which corresponded to 10.58% of the 5% solidarity contribution. Consequently, the Claimant agreed with a deduction by the Respondent of EUR 39,121.5 from each instalment of the transfer compensation.

5. As a result, the Claimant claimed from the Respondent the payment of EUR 835,878.75 as third instalment of the transfer compensation, plus 5% interest p.a. as of 1 March 2016. The Claimant further requested the imposition of sporting sanctions on the Respondent.

6. In its statement of defence, the Respondent solely rejected the Claimant’s claim, considering that the relevant matter was pending with two different reference numbers, the first case regarding the first two instalments having already been decided by the relevant deciding body of FIFA.

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 at hand. In this respect, he referred to art. 21 of the Rules

Player E Governing the Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber (edition 2015). Consequently, and since the present matter was submitted to FIFA on 28 April 2016, thus after the aforementioned rules entered into force (1 April 2015), the Single Judge concluded that the 2015 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. 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 2016 edition 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 28 April 2016. In view of the foregoing, the Single Judge concluded that the 2015 edition of the FIFA Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players (hereinafter: the Regulations) is applicable to the matter as to the substance.

3. 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 4 as well as art. 22 lit. f) 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.

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. 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 the parties had signed a transfer agreement on 30 June 2015 for the permanent transfer of the player from the Claimant to the Respondent, in exchange of the payment by the Respondent to the Claimant of the amount of EUR 3,500,000 payable in four equal instalments of EUR 875,000 respectively due on 30 August 2015, 30 November 2015, 29 February 2016 and 30 June 2016.

6. In continuation, the Single Judge noted that the Claimant lodged a claim against the Respondent in front of FIFA for the outstanding payment of the third instalment of the relevant transfer compensation, which fell due on 29 February 2016. Equally, the Single Judge took note that the Claimant agreed

Player E with the Respondent’s deduction from each instalment of the amount of EUR 39,121.5 as the relevant proportion of solidarity contribution related to the transfer in question.

7. In this regard and for the sake of good order, the Single Judge wished to emphasise that the Respondent did not provide any conclusive evidence in order to establish that it did pay training clubs the relevant proportion of the solidarity contribution, so that such percentage should be deducted from the amount due to the Claimant.

8. Notwithstanding the above and 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, the Single Judge held that the Respondent must fulfil the obligation it entered into with the Claimant by means of the contract signed between the parties.

9. In this respect, the Single Judge observed that the Respondent did not provide any valid arguments or conclusive evidence for the non-payment of the relevant amount due to the Claimant.

10. Consequently, considering the Claimant’s request as well as the legal principle of non ultra petita, the Single Judge concluded that the Respondent must pay to the Claimant the outstanding third instalment due under the transfer agreement in the amount of EUR 835,878.75.

11. In continuation and in view of the request of the Claimant for interest, the Single Judge decided that an interest of 5% per year on the amount of EUR 835,878.75 should apply from 1 March 2016 until the date of effective payment.

12. 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 (cf. art. 18 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules).

13. On account of the above, and considering that the claim of the Claimant had been partially accepted and that the Respondent was the party at fault, the Single Judge concluded that the Respondent had to bear the entire costs of the current proceedings before FIFA. Furthermore and according to Annexe A

Player E of the Procedural Rules, the costs of the proceedings are to be levied on the basis of the amount in dispute.

14. On that basis, the Single Judge held that the amount to be taken into consideration in the present proceedings was EUR 835,878.75. Consequently and taking into account that the total amount in dispute in the present matter was over CHF 200,000, the Single Judge concluded that the maximum amount of costs of the proceedings corresponded to CHF 25,000.

15. In conclusion, and in view of the particular circumstances of the present matter, the Single Judge determined the costs of the current proceedings to the amount of CHF 20,000 and decided that such amount had 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, 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 the present decision, the total amount of EUR 835,878.75, plus interest at a rate of 5% per year on the said amount from 1 March 2016 until the date of effective payment.

3. If the aforementioned amount, plus interest as established above, is not paid within the aforementioned deadline, 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, Club C, within 30 days as from the notification of the present decision as follows:

4.1 The amount of CHF 15,000 has to be paid directly 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

Player E

4.2 The amount of CHF 5,000 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 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 art. 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