F.I.F.A. – Players’ Status Committee / Commissione per lo Status dei Calciatori – club vs club disputes / controversie tra società – (2019-2020) – fifa.com – atto non ufficiale – Decision 14 June 2020
Asociación del Fútbol Argentino
gerenciajugadores@afa.org.ar
Re: Player Teófilo Antonio Gutierrez Roncancio
(Club Sporting Clube de Portugal, Portugal / Club CA Rosario Central,
Argentina)
(Ref. Nr. 19-02286/lsk)
Fédération Internationale de Football As sociation
FIFA-Strasse 20 P.O. Box 8044 Zurich Switzerland Tel: +41 43/222 7777
Dear Sirs,
Please find attached, as requested by the club, CA Rosario Central, the grounds of the
decision passed in the aforementioned matter by the Single Judge of the Players´
Status Committee on 5 May 2020.
Yours faithfully,
On behalf of the
Players' Status Committee
Erika Montemor Ferreira
Head of Players’ Status
Decis ion of the S ingle Judge
of the Play ers ’ S tatus Committee
passed on 5 May 2020,
by
Stefano La Porta (Italy)
Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee,
on the claim presented by the club
Sporting Clube de Portugal, Portugal
represented by Mr Jose Miguel Albuquerque
as Claimant
against the club
CA Rosario Central, Argentina
as Respondent
regarding a contractual dispute arisen between the parties in connection with overdue
payables and relating to the player Teofilo Antonio Gutierrez Roncancio
I. Facts of the case
1. On 17 January 2017, the Portuguese club, Sporting Clube de Portugal (hereinafter:
“the Claimant”) and the Argentinean club, CA Rosario Central (hereinafter: “the
Respondent”) signed a loan agreement for the transfer of the player Teofilo
Antonio Gutierrez Roncancio (hereinafter: “the player”) from the Claimant to the
Respondent for a fee of EUR 500,000.
2. According to the third clause of the loan agreement the Respondent had to pay to
the Claimant the above-mentioned loan fee amounting to EUR 500,000 in 3
instalments, as follows:
1) EUR 150,000 by no later than 20 days from the date of signature of the loan
agreement,
2) EUR 200,000 on 28 February 2017 and
3) EUR 150,000 on 30 June 2017.
3. On 10 December 2018, the Claimant and the Respondent signed another agreement
(hereinafter: “the payment agreement”) as per which the Respondent undertook to
pay the Claimant the outstanding amount of EUR 160,000.
4. According to the first clause of the payment agreement the Claimant accepted to
receive from the Respondent an amount of EUR 150,000 as outstanding loan fee (cf.
third instalment of the loan agreement) plus interests until that date amounting to
EUR 10,000. The total amount of EUR 160,000 would be paid by the Respondent in
5 instalments, as follows:
1) EUR 30,000 by no later than 15 days from the date signature of the payment
agreement,
2) EUR 50,000 on 25 February 2019;
3) EUR 40,000 on 25 April 2019;
4) EUR 30,000 on 25 June 2019 and
5) EUR 10,000 on 25 August 2019.
5. The fifth clause of the payment agreement provided that in case the Respondent
will be in delay of payment of the aforementioned instalments a penalty equivalent
to 10% of the outstanding amount will apply in favour of the Claimant.
6. On 7 October 2019, the Claimant put the Respondent in default of payment of the
amount of EUR 128,952.24, corresponding to EUR 160,000 minus EUR 31,047.76 already
paid plus “10% interest”, granting the Respondent 10 days to remedy the default,
however to no avail.
7. On 19 December 2019, the Claimant lodged a claim in front of FIFA against the
Respondent requesting the following:
I. to declare that the Respondent breached the payment agreement by failing to
pay the agreed amount of EUR 160,000 on time;
II. to condemn the Respondent to pay the outstanding amount of EUR 128,952.24
plus an interest at a rate of 5% per annum from 30 June 2017 until the date of
effective payment and
III. procedural costs.
8. In particular, the Claimant claimed that up until the date of the claim the Respondent
has only paid the amount of EUR 31,047.76 based on the payment agreement.
9. In its reply, the Respondent claimed that the non-payment was due to exclusively to
force majeure, considering the current economic situation in Argentina, with several
strict conditions to obtain foreign currency and make international payments.
10. The Respondent requested that the claim of the Claimant should be entirely rejected.
II. Cons iderations of the S ingle Judge of the Play ers ’ S tatus Committee
1. First of all, the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee (hereinafter: “the Single
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 19 December
2019. Consequently, the November 2019 edition of the Rules Governing the Procedures
of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: “the
Procedural Rules”) is applicable to the matter at hand (cf. art. 21 of the Procedural
Rules).
2. Subsequently, the Single 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
March 2020), and considering that the present claim was lodged on 19 December 2019,
the October 2019 edition of said Regulations (hereinafter: “the Regulations”) is
applicable to the matter at hand as to the substance.
3. Furthermore, the Single Judge referred to art. 3 par. 2 and par. 3 of the Procedural Rules
and confirmed that in accordance with art. 23 par. 1 and par. 4 in conjunction with art.
22 lit. f) of the Regulations, he is competent to deal with the present matter, which
concerns a dispute between two clubs affiliated to different associations.
4. The competence of the Single Judge and the applicable regulations having been
established, the Single Judge entered into the substance of the matter. In this respect,
the Single Judge started by acknowledging all the above-mentioned facts as well as the
arguments and the documentation on 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. Having said this, the Single Judge acknowledged that the Claimant and the Respondent
signed a loan agreement regarding the temporary transfer of the player, pursuant to
which the Respondent undertook to pay to the Claimant the total amount of EUR
600,000.
6. Subsequently, the Single Judge took note that the Claimant and the Respondent signed
the payment agreement by means of which the parties established a new payment plan
of the outstanding amount of EUR 160,000 in five instalments (cf. point I.4 above).
7. The Single Judge further acknowledged that, on 19 December 2019, the Claimant
lodged a claim against the Respondent in front of FIFA, maintaining that the
Respondent has overdue payables towards it in the total amount of EUR 128,952.54,
corresponding to part of the instalment that fell due on 25 February 2019, as well as,
the instalments that fell due on 25 April 2019; 25 June 2019 and 25 August 2019 as per
the payment agreement.
8. The Single Judge further observed that the Claimant asked to be awarded 5% interest
p.a. as of 30 June 2017 until the date of effective payment.
9. In this context, the Single Judge took particular note of the fact that, on 7 October 2019,
the Claimant put the Respondent in default of payment of the aforementioned
instalments amounting to EUR 128,952.24, setting a time limit of 10 days in order to
remedy the default.
10. Consequently, the Single Judge concluded that the Claimant had duly proceeded in
accordance with art. 12bis par. 3 of the Regulations, which stipulates that the creditor
(player or club) must have put the debtor club in default in writing and have granted a
deadline of at least ten days for the debtor club to comply with its financial
obligation(s).
11. Subsequently, the Single Judge observed that the Respondent, for its part, argued not
being in a position to pay to the Claimant due to force majeure, based on strict domestic
regulations.
12. In this regard, the Single Judge wished to stress that, in line with the well-established
jurisprudence of the Players´ Status Committee, financial difficulties of clubs cannot be
considered a valid justification for non-compliance by a club with its essential
contractual obligations that is to pay in a timely manner. The Single Judge further noted
that the Claimant cannot be held liable for said exogenous economic circumstances or
strict national requirements.
13. Having said this, the Single Judge acknowledged that, in accordance with the payment
agreement, the Respondent was obliged to pay to the Claimant the amount of EUR
160,000 in five instalments.
14. Taking into account the documentation presented by the Claimant in support of its
petition, the Single Judge concluded that the Claimant had substantiated its claim
pertaining to overdue payables with sufficient documentary evidence.
15. On account of the aforementioned considerations, the Single Judge established that the
Respondent failed to remit EUR 128,952.24 to the Claimant.
16. In addition, the Single Judge established that the Respondent had delayed a due
payment for more than 30 days without a prima facie contractual basis.
17. Consequently, the Single Judge decided that, in accordance with the general legal
principle of pacta sunt servanda, the Respondent is liable to pay to the Claimant overdue
payables in the total amount of EUR 128,952.24.
18. Furthermore, taking into consideration the Claimant’s claim, the Single Judge decided
to award the Claimant interest at the rate of 5% p.a. on the relevant instalments as of
the respective due dates, i.e. 26 February 2019; 26 April 2019; 26 June 2019 and 26
August 2019.
19. In continuation, taking into account the consideration under number II./16. above, the
Single Judge referred to art.12bis par. 2 of the Regulations which stipulates that any
club found to have delayed a due payment for more than 30 days without a prima facie
contractual basis may be sanctioned in accordance with art. 12bis par. 4 of the
Regulations.
20. The Single Judge established that in virtue of art. 12bis par. 4 of the Regulations he has
competence to impose sanctions on the Respondent. Therefore, and in the absence of
the circumstance of repeated offence, the Single Judge decided to impose a warning on
the Respondent in accordance with art. 12bis par. 4 lit. a) of the Regulations.
21. In this respect, the Single Judge wished to highlight that a repeated offence will be
considered as an aggravating circumstance and lead to more severe penalty in
accordance with art. 12bis par. 6 of the Regulations.
22. Furthermore, taking into account the consideration under number II./3. above, the
Single Judge referred to par. 1 and 2 of art. 24bis of the Regulations, which stipulate
that, with its decision, the pertinent FIFA deciding body shall also rule on the
consequences deriving from the failure of the concerned party to pay the relevant
amounts of outstanding remuneration and/or compensation in due time.
23. In this regard, the Single Judge pointed out that, against clubs, the consequence of the
failure to pay the relevant amounts in due time shall consist of a ban from registering
any new players, either nationally or internationally, up until the due amounts are paid
and for the maximum duration of three entire and consecutive registration periods.
24. Therefore, bearing in mind the above, the Single Judge decided that, in the event that
the Respondent does not pay the amounts due to the Claimant within 45 days as from
the moment in which the Claimant, following the notification of the present decision,
communicates the relevant bank details to the Respondent, a ban from registering any
new players, either nationally or internationally, for the maximum duration of three
entire and consecutive registration periods shall become effective on the Respondent in
accordance with art. 24bis par. 2 and 4 of the Regulations.
25. The Single Judge recalled that the above-mentioned ban will be lifted immediately and
prior to its complete serving upon payment of the due amounts, in accordance with art.
24bis par. 3 of the Regulations.
26. 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 and according to which 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.
27. Taking into account that the responsibility of the failure to comply with the payment of
the amount as agreed in the payment agreement can be entirely attributed to the
Respondent, the Single Judge concluded that the Respondent has to bear the costs of
the current proceedings before FIFA. 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 128,952.24. Consequently, the Single Judge concluded that
the maximum amount of costs of the proceedings corresponds to CHF 15,000.
28. In light of the above, the Single Judge determined the costs of the current proceedings
in the amount of CHF 9,000. Finally, the Single Judge decided that the Respondent has
to pay CHF 9,000 in order to cover the costs of the present proceedings.
III. Decis ion of the S ingle Judge of the Play ers ’ S tatus Committee
1. The claim of the Claimant, Sporting Clube de Portugal, is partially accepted.
2. The Respondent, CA Rosario Central, has to pay to the Claimant the amount of EUR
128,952.24, plus interest of 5% p.a. as follows:
- on EUR 48,952.24 as from 26 February 2019 until the effective date of payment;
- on EUR 40,000 as from 26 April 2019 until the effective date of payment;
- on EUR 30,000 as from 26 June 2019 until the effective date of payment;
- on EUR 10,000 as from 26 August 2019 until the effective date of payment.
3. Any further claim of the Claimant is rejected.
4. A warning is imposed on the Respondent.
5. The Claimant is directed to inform the Respondent, immediately and directly, of the
relevant bank account to which the Respondent must pay the amounts plus interest
mentioned under point 2. above.
6. The Respondent shall provide evidence of payment of the due amounts plus interest in
accordance with point 2. to FIFA to the e-mail address psdfifa@fifa.org, duly translated, if
need be, into one of the official FIFA languages (English, French, German, Spanish).
7. In the event that the amounts due plus interest in accordance with point 2. above are not
paid by the Respondent within 45 days as from the notification by the Claimant of the
relevant bank details to the Respondent, the Respondent shall be banned from registering
any new players, either nationally or internationally, up until the due amount is paid and
for the maximum duration of three entire and consecutive registration periods (cf. art.
24bis of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players).
8. The ban mentioned in point 7. above will be lifted immediately and prior to its complete
serving, once the due amounts plus interest are paid.
9. In the event that the aforementioned sums plus interest are still not paid by the end of
the ban of three entire and consecutive registration periods, the present matter shall be
submitted, upon request, to FIFA’s Disciplinary Committee for consideration and a formal
decision.
10. The final costs of the proceedings in the amount of CHF 9,000 are to be paid by the
Respondent in the following manner:
a. CHF 5,000 directly to the Claimant, to the bank account indicated by the latter in
accordance with point 5. above;
b. CHF 4,000 to FIFA to the following bank account with reference to case nr. 19-
02286/lsk:
UBS Zurich
Account number 366.677.01U (FIFA Players’ Status)
Clearing number 230
IBAN: CH27 0023 0230 3666 7701U
SWIFT: UBSWCHZH80A
*****
Note related to the publication:
The FIFA administration may publish decisions issued by the Players’ Status Committee or the
DRC. Where such decisions contain confidential information, FIFA may decide, at the request
of a party within five days of the notification of the motivated decision, to publish an
anonymised or a redacted version (cf. article 20 of the Rules Governing the Procedures of the
Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber).
Note related to the appeal procedure:
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. 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:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer