F.I.F.A. – Dispute Resolution Chamber / Camera di Risoluzione delle Controversie – solidarity contribution/ contributo di solidarietà – (2016-2017) – fifa.com – atto non ufficiale – Decision 13 October 2016

Decision of the

Dispute Resolution Chamber

passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 13 October 2016,

in the following composition

Geoff Thompson (England), Chairman

Theo van Seggelen (Netherlands), member

Wouter Lambrecht (Belgium), member

on the claim presented by the club,

Club A, Country B

as Claimant

against the club,

Club C, Country D

as Respondent

regarding training compensation in connection

with the Player E

I. Facts of the case

1. According to the player passport issued by the Football Federation of Country B, the player, Player E (hereinafter: the player), born on 22 February 1994, was registered with its affiliated clubs as an amateur as follows:

- Club A: as from 29 October 2008 until 23 October 2009;

- Club F: as from 24 October 2009 until 28 September 2011;

- Club A: as from 29 September 2011 until 30 November 2014;

- Club G: as from 2 December 2014 until 30 November 2015.

2. The Football Federation of Country B confirmed that in spite of having the same “promoter”, Club A and Club F constitute two different entities / clubs.

3. The relevant football seasons in Country B ran as follows:

- 2008-09 season: as from 29 October 2008 until 26 July 2009;

- 2009-10 season: as from 24 October 2009 until 28 July 2010;

- 2010-11 season: as from 2 August 2010 until 30 July 2011;

- 2011-12 season: as from 29 September 2011 until 31 July 2012;

- 2012-13 season: as from 1 December 2012 until 31 October 2013;

- 2013-14 season: as from 1 December 2013 until 30 October 2014;

- 2014-15 season: as from 1 December 2014 until 31 October 2015.

4. On 24 February 2016, the Football Federation of Country B issued the International Transfer Certificate in paper version in favour of the Football Association of Country D in order for the player to be registered with the Club of Country D, Club C (hereinafter: the Respondent).

5. According to the Transfer Matching System (TMS), the Respondent belonged to the category III (indicative amount of EUR 30,000 per year within UEFA) during the season when the player was registered with the Respondent.

6. On 20 April 2016, the Respondent sent a letter to Club A informing that the player was already professional with Club G and that consequently training compensation is only due to the player’s former club, i.e. Club G.

7. On 12 May 2016, Club A contacted FIFA requesting to be awarded with the amount of EUR 160,000 as training compensation in connection with the first registration of the player as a professional with the Respondent.

8. In its claim, Club A first points out that the Respondent’s correspondence dated 20 April 2016 demonstrates that the player is registered as a professional with the latter club. In this respect, Club A insists that the fact that the player was granted a work permit as well as the twelve games that the player played with the Respondent’s first team constitute another evidence of his professional status. In continuation, Club A questions why the transfer was not registered in the TMS if the player was already professional with Club G. In this regard, Club A emphasises that the International Transfer Certificate issued by the Football Federation of Country B mentions the player’s amateur status.

9. In view of the above, and arguing that Club F constitutes its youth team, Club A claims the amount of EUR 160,000.

10. Despite having been invited by FIFA to provide its position regarding the claim, the Respondent never replied to the claim.

II. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber

1. First of all, the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter also referred to as DRC or Chamber) analysed whether it was competent to deal with the case at hand. In this respect, it took note that the present matter was submitted to FIFA on 12 May 2016. Consequently, the 2015 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 members of the Chamber referred to art. 3 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules and confirmed that in accordance with art. 24 par. 1 and 2 in combination with art. 22 lit. (d) of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2016), the Dispute Resolution Chamber is competent to deal with the matter at stake relating to training compensation between clubs belonging to different associations.

3. Furthermore, the Chamber 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, and in view of the considerations that will be explained hereunder as to the date of registration of the player (see points II.10 and 11 below), it confirmed that in accordance with art. 26 par. 1 and 2 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2016), the 2015 edition of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (hereinafter: the Regulations) is applicable to the matter at hand as to the substance.

4. The competence of the DRC and the applicable regulations having been established, the Chamber entered into the substance of the matter. The members of the Chamber started by acknowledging the facts of the case as well as the documentation on file. However, the Chamber emphasised 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. At this stage, the Chamber emphasised that, in accordance with the Football Federation of Country B’s confirmation, the claimant in the present procedure is Club A (hereinafter: the Claimant).

6. Having established the above, the DRC duly took note that the Claimant maintains that it is entitled to receive training compensation based on the first registration of the player as a professional with the Respondent.

7. Equally, the Chamber noted that the Respondent failed to present its response to the claim of the Claimant, despite having been invited to do so. In this way, the Respondent renounced its right to defence and, thus, accepted the allegations of the Claimant.

8. As a consequence of the aforementioned consideration, the DRC established that in accordance with art. 9 par. 3 of the Procedural Rules he shall take a decision upon the basis of the documents on file, in other words upon the statements and documents presented by the Claimant.

9. Having said the above, the DRC stated that, as established in art. 1 par. 1 of Annexe 4 in combination with art. 2 of Annexe 4 of the Regulations, training compensation is payable, as a general rule, for training incurred between the ages of 12 and 21 when the player concerned is registered for the first time as a professional, or when a professional is transferred between two clubs of two different Associations, before the end of the season of the player’s 23rd birthday.

10. In this context, the Chamber observed that pursuant to the player passport issued by the Football Federation of Country B, the player was an amateur with the Club of Country B, Club G, before being transferred to the Respondent. In continuation, the members of the Chamber highlighted that by means of its correspondence dated 20 April 2016, and in particular by stating that training compensation would, in principle, be due to Club G on the basis of art. 2 al. 1 ii. of Annexe 4 of the Regulations, the Respondent implicitly acknowledged that the player had been registered as a professional with it between 24 February 2016 and 20 April 2016.

11. In view of the above, the DRC concluded that based on the documents at disposal it can be established that the player in question, born on 22 February 1994, signed his first professional contract with the Respondent between 24 February 2016 and 20 April 2016, i.e. before the end of the season of his 23rd birthday.

12. On account the above considerations, the DRC decided that the Respondent is liable to pay training compensation to the Claimant in accordance with art. 20 and Annexe 4 of the Regulations.

13. Turning its attention to the calculation of training compensation, the Chamber referred to art. 5 par. 1 and par. 2 of Annexe 4 of the Regulations, which stipulate that as a general rule, to calculate the training compensation, it is necessary to take the costs that would have been incurred by the new club if it had trained the player itself.

14. In continuation, the Chamber recalled that the player was born on 22 February 1994 and was registered with the Claimant as an amateur as from 29 October 2008 until 23 October 2009 as well as from 29 September 2011 until 30 November 2014. In this respect, the DRC pointed out that in view of Football Federation of Country B’s confirmation that the Claimant and Club F are two different entities, the period when the player was registered with Club F cannot be taken into account.

15. Therefore, the DRC considered that the Claimant is, thus, entitled to receive training compensation for the aforementioned period, i.e. for a period of 50 months between the seasons of his 15th and 21st birthday.

16. Moreover, the Chamber took into account that the Respondent belonged to the category III (indicative amount of EUR 30,000 per year) during the period when the player was registered as a professional.

17. In view of all of the above, the DRC decided to partially accept the claim of the Claimant and held that the Respondent is liable to pay the amount of EUR 111,666.66 to the Claimant as training compensation in relation to the registration of the player with the Respondent.

18. In continuation, the Dispute Resolution Chamber established that any further claim lodged by the Claimant is rejected.

19. Lastly, the Chamber 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 DRC relating to disputes regarding training compensation, costs in the maximum amount of CHF 25,000 are levied. It is further stipulated that the costs are to be borne in consideration of the parties’ degree of success in the proceedings and that, in accordance with Annex A of the Procedural Rules, the costs of the proceedings are to be levied on the basis of the amount in dispute.

20. In respect of the above, the Chamber held that the amount to be taken into consideration in the present proceedings is EUR 160,000 related to the claim of the Claimant. Consequently, the Chamber concluded that the maximum amount of costs of the proceedings corresponds to CHF 20,000 (cf. table in Annex A).

21. As a result, and taking into account the lack of reply of the Respondent as well as the degree of success, the Chamber determined the costs of the current proceedings to the amount of CHF 20,000, which shall be borne by the Respondent.

III. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber

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

2. The Respondent, Club C, has to pay to the Claimant within 30 days as from the date of notification of this decision, the amount of EUR 111,666.66.

3. In the event that the aforementioned amount is not paid within the stated time limit, interest at the rate of 5% p.a. will apply as of the expiry of the stipulated time limit and the present matter shall be submitted, upon request, to the FIFA Disciplinary Committee for its consideration and a formal decision.

4. Any further claim lodged by the Claimant is rejected.

5. The final costs of the proceedings in the amount of CHF 20,000 are to be paid by the Respondent to FIFA, within 30 days of notification of the present decision, 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

6. The Claimant is directed to inform the Respondent immediately and directly of the account number to which the remittance under point 2. above is to be made and to notify the Dispute Resolution Chamber 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 Dispute Resolution Chamber:

__________________________________

Marco Villiger

Deputy Secretary General

Enclosed: CAS directives