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 6 December 2016

Decision of the

Single Judge of the sub

committee of the

Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC)

passed on 6 December 2016,

by Theo van Seggelen (Netherlands),

Single Judge of the sub-committee of the DRC,

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 29 May 1993, was registered with its affiliated clubs as follows:

Club From To Status

Club A

(hereinafter: Claimant)

2 June 2009

31 August 2009

amateur

Claimant

1 September 2009

31 December 2015

professional

Club F

(on a loan basis)

14 July 2014

31 December 2014

Professional

Club G

(on a loan basis)

8 January 2015

15 May 2015

professional

Club H

(on a loan basis)

6 July 2015

31 December 2015

professional

2. Moreover, according to the player passport, the football season in Country B follows the calendar year.

3. According to the information contained in the Transfer Matching System (TMS), the player was registered with the Club of Country D, Club C (hereinafter: the Respondent), as a professional, on 24 February 2016. The International Transfer Certificate (ITC) of the player was delivered from the Football Federation of Country B to the Football Federation of Country D on 24 February 2016, indicating the Claimant as the player’s former club.

4. Also according to the information contained in the TMS, the Respondent belonged to the category II within UEFA (indicative amount of EUR 60,000 per year) during the season when the player was registered with it.

5. On 10 October 2016, the Claimant lodged a claim against the Respondent in front of FIFA claiming payment of training compensation from the Respondent in connection with the transfer of the player to the Respondent. In particular, the Claimant requested the amount of EUR 334,800 plus interest as of the due date.

6. In particular, the Claimant stated that the period of time that the player was registered with the club of origin and the period of time that the player was registered with a club on loan, should be considered as one entire timeframe and requested training compensation for the period between 2 June 2009 and 31 December 2014.

7. Moreover, the Claimant requested that the Respondent bear the costs of the procedure.

8. Even though invited to do so, the Respondent did not reply to the claim of the Claimant.

II. Considerations of the Single Judge of the sub-committee of the DRC

1. First of all, the Single Judge of the sub-committee of the Dispute Resolution Chamber (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 10 October 2016. Consequently, the 2015 edition of the Rules Governing the Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: Procedural Rules) is applicable to the matter at hand (cf. art. 21 of the Procedural Rules).

2. Subsequently, the Single Judge referred to art. 3 of the Procedural Rules, which states that the Dispute Resolution Chamber shall examine its jurisdiction in light of arts 22 to 24 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2016). In accordance with art. 3 of Annexe 6 in conjunction with art. 24 par. 3 and art. 22 lit. d) of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players, the Single Judge is competent to decide on the present dispute relating to training compensation between clubs belonging to different associations handled through TMS.

3. Furthermore, 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 2016), and considering that the player was registered with the Respondent on 24 February 2016, the 2015 edition of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (hereinafter: Regulations) is applicable to the matter at hand as to the substance.

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 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. In particular, the Single Judge recalled that in accordance with art. 6 par. 3 of Annexe 3 of the Regulations, FIFA may use, within the scope of proceedings pertaining to the application of the Regulations, any documentation or evidence generated or contained in the Transfer Matching System (TMS).

5. The Single Judge took note that the Claimant maintained being entitled to receive training compensation from the Respondent in the amount of EUR 334,800, plus interest, in connection with the transfer of the player to the Respondent in February 2016.

6. Furthermore, the Single Judge took into account that the Respondent failed to present its response to the claim, in spite of having been invited to do so. In this way, the Single Judge considered that the Respondent renounced its right to defence and thus, accepted the allegations of the Claimant.

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

8. Bearing in mind the previous considerations, the Single Judge referred to the rules applicable to training compensation and stated that, as established in art. 20 of the Regulations as well as in art. 1 par. 1 of Annexe 4 in combination with art. 2 par. 1 lit. ii. 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 a player is transferred between two clubs of two different associations before the end of the season of the player’s 23rd birthday.

9. In addition, the Single Judge recalled that the player was registered as a professional with the Respondent on 24 February 2016 and thus transferred to the Respondent before the end of the season of his 23rd birthday.

10. In continuation, the Single Judge took note that the player was registered with the Claimant as from 2 June 2009 until 31 December 2015, during which period of time he was also transferred on a loan basis to different Clubs of Country B (cf. point I.1. above).

11. In this context, the Single Judge made reference to the jurisprudence of the Dispute Resolution Chamber, according to which, within the framework of loans, the period of time that the player was registered with the club of origin and the period of time that the player was registered with a club on loan should be considered as one entire timeframe. Bearing this in mind as well as art. 3 par. 1 sent. 3 of Annexe 4 of the Regulations, which stipulates that “In the case of subsequent transfers of the professional, training compensation will only be owed to his former club for the time he was effectively trained by that club”, the Single Judge concluded that the Claimant was the former club of the player.

12. On account of the above, the Single Judge concluded that the Claimant is entitled to receive training compensation from the Respondent in view of the subsequent transfer of the player from the Claimant to the Respondent.

13. In this regard, bearing in mind that the player was transferred on a loan basis from the Claimant to other clubs, the Single Judge highlighted that, although the period of time that the player was registered with the club of origin and the period of time that the player was registered with a club on loan should be considered as one entire timeframe, the club which transferred the player on a loan basis to another club is entitled to training compensation for the entire period of time during which it effectively trained the player, however, excluding the period of time of the loan(s).

14. Turning his attention to the calculation of training compensation, the Single Judge referred to art. 5 par. 1 and par. 2 of the Annexe 4 of the Regulations, which stipulate that as a general rule, it is necessary to take the costs that would have been incurred by the new club as if it had trained the player itself and thus it is calculated based on the training costs of the new club multiplied by the number of years of training with the former club.

15. In this respect, the Single Judge took note that, according to the player passport issued by the Football Federation of Country B and considering the period relevant for the purposes of training compensation, the player, born on 29 May 1993, was registered with the Claimant as from 2 June 2009 until 31 December 2014. Moreover, bearing in mind point II./13. above, the Single Judge took into account that, during the aforementioned period, the player was registered on a loan basis with the Club of Country B, Club F, from 14 July 2014 until 31 December 2014.

16. Therefore, the Single Judge concluded that the Claimant is entitled to receive training compensation for the period it effectively trained the player, i.e. from 2 June 2009 until 13 July 2014.

17. In continuation, the Single Judge took due note that according to the information contained in the TMS, the Respondent belonged to category II within UEFA during the season when the player was registered with it. In this regard, the Single Judge further took into account that according to FIFA circular no. 1484 dated 30 April 2015 the indicative amount within UEFA for category II clubs is of EUR 60,000 per year.

18. Having said this, the Single Judge took into account that the player, born on 29 May 1993, was registered with the Claimant during 7 months of the season of the player’s 16th birthday (EUR 35,000), during the complete seasons of the player’s 17th, 18th, 19th and 20th birthdays (EUR 240,000) and during 6 months of the season of the player’s 21st birthday (EUR 30,000).

19. Consequently and taking into account all the above-mentioned elements, the Single Judge decided that the claim of the Claimant is partially accepted and that the Respondent must pay to the Claimant training compensation in the amount of EUR 305,000 in connection with the Player E.

20. Moreover, taking into consideration the Claimant’s claim as well as art. 3 par. 2 of Annexe 4 of the Regulations, the Single Judge decided that the Respondent has to pay, in conformity with the DRC’s longstanding practice, interest at 5% p.a. over the amount payable as training compensation as of the 31st day of registration of the player with the Respondent, i.e. as of 26 March 2016, until the date of effective payment.

21. Subsequently, the Single Judge decided that any further claim lodged by the Claimant is rejected.

22. 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 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.

23. In respect of the above, the Single Judge held that the amount to be taken into consideration in the present proceedings is EUR 334,800 related to the claim of the Claimant. Consequently, the Single Judge concluded that the maximum amount of costs of the proceedings corresponds to CHF 25,000 (cf. table in Annex A).

24. As a result, taking into account that the claim of the Claimant has been partially accepted and the fact that the Respondent failed to reply to the claim, the Single Judge concluded that both the Claimant and the Respondent have to bear a part of the costs of the present proceedings in front of FIFA.

25. Considering the above, the Single Judge determined the costs of the current proceedings to the amount of CHF 25,000, CHF 5,000 of which shall be borne by the Claimant and CHF 20,000 of which shall be borne by the Respondent.

III. Decision of the Single Judge of the sub-committee of the DRC

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 305,000 plus 5% interest p.a. as of 26 March 2016 until the date of effective payment.

3. In the event that the aforementioned sum plus interest is not paid within the stated time limit, the present matter shall be submitted, upon request, to FIFA’s Disciplinary Committee for 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 25,000 are to be paid within 30 days as from the date of the notification of the present decision as follows:

5.1. CHF 20,000 by the Respondent 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

5.2. CHF 5,000 by the Claimant to FIFA. Given that the Claimant has already paid the amount of CHF 5,000 as advance of costs at the start of the present proceedings, the Claimant does not have to pay an additional amount as costs of the proceedings.

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 Single Judge of the sub-committee of the DRC 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

sub-committee of the DRC:

Marco Villiger

Chief Legal & Integrity Officer

Encl. CAS Directives