F.I.F.A. – Players’ Status Committee / Commissione per lo Status dei Calciatori – club vs club disputes / controversie tra società – (2020-2021) – fifa.com – atto non ufficiale – Decision 23 February 2021

Decision of the

Single Judge of the PSC

passed on 23 February 2021

regarding a dispute concerning the transfer of the player Felipe Estrella Galeazzi

BY:

Roy Vermeer (Netherlands), Single Judge of the PSC

CLAIMANT:

Ferroviaria, Brazil

Represented by Botelho & Torres Sociedade de Advogados

RESPONDENT:

Genoa Cricket FC, Italy

I. FACTS

1. On 8 September 2020, the Brazilian club Ferroviaria, (hereinafter: ‘the Claimant’) and the Italian club Genoa Cricket FC (hereinafter: ‘the Respondent’) entered into a transfer agreement (hereinafter: ’the agreement’) for the player Felipe Estrella Galeazzi (hereinafter: ’the player’), in relation to the transfer of the player from the Claimant to the Respondent for a transfer compensation of EUR 350,000.

2. Pursuant to clause 2.1 of the agreement, the parties agreed that the transfer compensation payment will be due and payable in two instalments as follows:

a) EUR 175,000 to be paid ‘within 7 business days upon receipt of the International Transfer Certificate (“ITC”) of the player’; and

b) EUR 175,000 to be paid on 31 January 2021

3. According to the information in the Transfer Matching System (TMS), the ITC of the player was delivered to the Federazione Italiana Giuoco Calcio (FIGC) on 15 September 2020.

4. On 6 October 2020, the Claimant sent a notice of default to the Respondent, granting it a 10 days’ deadline to pay the outstanding amount of EUR 175,000, due to its failure to pay the said amount within 7 business days upon receipt of the ITC of the player, however to no avail.

5. On 9 November 2020, the Claimant lodged a claim against the Respondent before FIFA, claiming:

a) the total amount of EUR 175,000, plus interests of 5% p.a. as from 29 September 2020;

b) the reimbursement of advance of costs in the amount of CHF 4,000 paid by the Claimant; and

c) any additional costs imposed by the PSC.

6. In its claim, the Claimant explained that the Respondent should have been obliged to pay the first instalment of EUR 175,000 by no later than 29 September 2020, however failed to do so, even after it was put in default by the Claimant on 6 October 2020.

7. In its reply to the claim, the Respondent acknowledged that the amount as detailed in the Claimant’s claim is overdue and that it has not fulfilled its financial obligations as stipulated in the agreement.

8. In conclusion, the Respondent, indicated that its failure to comply with the conditions of the agreement is due to the financial constraints experienced in light of the COVID-19 pandemic and disruptions within the administrative functions of the club.

II. CONSIDERATIONS OF THE SINGLE JUDGE OF THE PSC

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 case at hand. Taking into account the wording of art. 21 of the June 2020 edition of the Rules Governing the Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: the Procedural Rules), the aforementioned edition of the Procedural Rules is applicable to the matter at hand.

2. Subsequently, the Single Judge referred to art. 3 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules and emphasized that, in accordance with art. 24 par. 1 in combination with art. 22 lit. f) of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players, the Single Judge is competent to deal with disputes between clubs belonging to different associations.

3. In continuation, the Single Judge analysed which edition of the Regulations of the Status and Transfer of Players should be applicable to the present matter. In this respect, the Single Judge confirmed that in accordance with art. 26 par. 1 and 2 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players, and considering that the claim was lodged on 9 November 2020, the October 2020 edition of the aforementioned regulations (hereinafter: the Regulations) is applicable to the matter at hand.

4. With the above having been established, the Single Judge entered into the substance of the matter. In doing so, it started to acknowledge the facts of the case as well as the documents contained in the file. However, the Single Judge emphasized that in the following considerations it will refer only to facts, arguments and documentary evidence, which it considered pertinent for the assessment of the matter at hand.

5. In this respect, the Single Judge noted that, on 8 September 2020, the parties concluded an agreement for the transfer of the player, from the Claimant to the Respondent, against payment of a transfer compensation in the amount of EUR 350,000, which was payable in two instalments, as follows:

a) EUR 175,000 to be paid ‘within 7 business days upon receipt of the International Transfer Certificate (“ITC”) of the player’; and

b) EUR 175,000 to be paid on 31 January 2021

6. Subsequently, the Single Judge observed that the Claimant lodged a claim before FIFA against the Respondent, maintaining that the Respondent failed to pay the total amount of EUR 175,000, corresponding to the first instalment due in accordance with the agreed transfer compensation fee.

7. In this context, the Single Judge took particular note of the fact that, on 6 October 2020, the Claimant put the Respondent in default of payment of the aforementioned amount, setting a time limit of 10 days in order to remedy the default.

8. The Single Judge further noted that according to TMS, the delivery date of the ITC of the player to the FIGC was 15 September 2020.

9. Subsequently, the Single Judge took into account that the Respondent, in reply to the claim, did not dispute the outstanding transfer compensation fee due, but argued that in light of the COVID-

19 pandemic it experienced financial constraints and accordingly could not make the due payment to the Claimant.

10. Having said that, the Single Judge wished to refer to the fact that, in light of the worldwide COVID-19 outbreak, FIFA issued a set of guidelines, the COVID-19 Guidelines, which aim at providing appropriate guidance and recommendations to member associations and their stakeholders, to both mitigate the consequences of disruptions caused by COVID-19 and ensure that any response is harmonised in the common interest. Moreover, on 11 June 2020, FIFA has issued an additional document, referred to as FIFA COVID-19 FAQ, which provides clarification about the most relevant questions in connection with the regulatory consequences of the COVID-19 outbreak and identifies solutions for new regulatory matters.

10. In this context, the Single Judge considered that – based on the above set of documents issued by FIFA - the arguments raised by the Respondent cannot be considered a valid reason for non-payment of the monies claimed by the Claimant, in other words, the reasons brought forward by the Respondent in its defence do not exempt the Respondent from its obligation to fulfil its contractual obligations towards the Claimant.

11. Furthermore, the Single Judge highlighted that the agreement was concluded and signed during the COVID-19 pandemic, therefore the argument of the Respondent regarding the impossibility to comply with its financial obligations due to the COVID-19 pandemic, cannot be accepted.

12. In addition, the Single Judge indicated that even though the Claimant had duly proceeded to place the Respondent in default and granted it a deadline of at least ten days to comply with its financial obligation(s), at the time that the default notice was issued, the amount in dispute was not overdue for more than 30 days. Consequently, the Single Judge established that the Respondent had not delayed a due payment for more than 30 days without a prima facie contractual basis.

13. However, taking into account the documentation presented by the Claimant, the Single Judge concluded that the Claimant had substantiated its claim with sufficient documentary evidence.

14. On account of the aforementioned considerations, the Single Judge established that the Respondent failed to remit the Claimant’s transfer compensation fee in the amount of EUR 175,000, corresponding to the first instalment under the agreement.

15. 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 the total amount of EUR 175,000, plus 5% interest p.a. on the said amount as from 30 September 2020 until the date of effective payment.

16. Furthermore, 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.

17. 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.

18. 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.

19. Finally, 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

20. Lastly, the Single Judge referred to the temporary amendments outlined in art. 18 par. 2 lit. ii) of the Procedural Rules, which entered in force in 10 June 2020, according to which no procedural costs shall be levied for any claim lodged between 10 June 2020 and 31 December 2020 (both inclusive), and determined given that the claim at hand was lodged on 3 July 2020, the decision shall be rendered free of costs.

III. DECISION OF THE SINGLE JUDGE OF THE PSC

1. The claim of the Claimant, Ferroviaria, is accepted.

2. The Respondent, Genoa Cricket FC, has to pay to the Claimant, the following amount:

- EUR 175,000 plus 5% interest p.a. as from 30 September 2020 until the date of effective payment.

3. Any further claims of the Claimant are rejected.

4. The Claimant is directed to immediately and directly inform the Respondent of the relevant bank account to which the Respondent must pay the due amount.

5. The Respondent shall provide evidence of payment of the due amount in accordance with this decision to psdfifa@fifa.org, duly translated, if applicable, into one of the official FIFA languages (English, French, German, Spanish).

6. In the event that the amount due, plus interest as established above is not paid by the Respondent within 45 days, as from the notification by the Claimant of the relevant bank details to the Respondent, the following consequences shall arise:

 1.

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. The aforementioned ban mentioned will be lifted immediately and prior to its complete serving, once the due amount is paid.

(cf. art. 24bis of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players).

2.

In the event that the payable amount as per in this decision is 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 the FIFA Disciplinary Committee.

For the Single Judge of the PSC:

Emilio García Silvero

Chief Legal & Compliance Officer

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) within 21 days of receipt of the notification of this decision.

NOTE RELATED TO THE PUBLICATION:

FIFA may publish this decision. For reasons of confidentiality, 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 Procedural Rules).

CONTACT INFORMATION:

Fédération Internationale de Football Association

FIFA-Strasse 20 P.O. Box 8044 Zurich Switzerland

www.fifa.com | legal.fifa.com | psdfifa@fifa.org | T: +41 (0)43 222 7777