F.I.F.A. – Dispute Resolution Chamber / Camera di Risoluzione delle Controversie – solidarity contribution/ contributo di solidarietà – (2020-2021) – fifa.com – atto non ufficiale – Decision 16 April 2021
Decision of the Single Judge of the
sub-committee of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 16 April 2021,
regarding training compensation in relation with the registration of the player Kierron
MASON with Charleston Battery (USA)
BY:
Tomislav Kasalo (Croatia), Single Judge of the sub-committee of the DRC
CLAIMANT:
W-CONNECTION, Trinidad and Tobago
RESPONDENT:
CHARLESTON BATTERY, USA
I. FACTS OF THE CASE
Player: Kierron MASON
Date of birth: 19 September 2001
Player passport: issued by the Trinidad and Tobago Football Association (TTFA) on an unknown
date
Season Birthday Club(s) Registration dates Status
12/13 –
15/16
n/a W-Connection 25/03/13 – 20/06/16 Amateur
(Permanent)
15/16 –
2017
n/a Marabella Family Crisis
Centre
21/06/16 – 14/05/18 Amateur
(Permanent)
2018 n/a W-Connection 14/05/18 – 31/12/18 Professional
(Permanent)
Sporting season
of the TTFA: 2012/2013: 1 September 2012 until 31 May 2013
2013/2014: 1 September 2013 until 31 May 2014
2014/2015: 1 September 2014 until 15 May 2015
2015/2016: 1 September 2015 until 31 May 2016
2016/2017: 1 October 2016 until 15 February 2017
2017: 1 June 2017 to 30 November 2017
2018: 1 June 2018 until 15 December 2018
Date of transfer: 18 March 2019, from W-Connection (Trinidad and Tobago) to Charleston
Battery (USA) as a professional (free agent)
Claimant club: W-Connection (Trinidad and Tobago)
Respondent club: Charleston Battery (USA)
CONCACAF, category IV (USD 2,000 per year)
Claim and Response:
1. On 17 September 2020, the Claimant requested USD 44,000 as training compensation “plus
5% p.a. interest as of the due date, until the date of effective payment”. The Claimant is basing
his claim on the subsequent registration of the player as a professional with the Respondent.
2. In this respect, the Claimant argued that the player was registered with it:
a. As from 1 September 2012 until 31 May 2013, i.e. 273 days of the season of the
player’s 14th birthday;
b. As from 1 September 2013 until 31 May 2014, i.e. 273 days of the season of the
player’s 15th birthday;
c. As from 1 September 2014 until 15 May 2015, i.e. 257 days of the season of the
player’s 16th birthday;
d. As from 1 September 2015 until 31 May 2016, i.e. 273 days of the season of the
player’s 17th birthday;
e. As from 1 October 2016 until 15 February 2017, i.e. 138 days of the season of the
player’s 18th birthday; and
f. As from 1 June 2018 until 15 February 2018, i.e. 198 days of the season of the player’s
20th birthday;
3. For the purpose of its calculation, the Claimant acknowledged that the Respondent was
classified as a training category IV club by the US Soccer Federation (USSF). Nevertheless, the
Claimant pointed out that the club was competing in the second professional division in the
USA, i.e. the USL Championship, thus it considered that the Respondent should be reclassified
under training category III in CONCACAF for the purpose of training compensation, in line with
the jurisprudence of the DRC.
4. On this particular topic, the Claimant pointed out that the USSF, despite having a provision in its
own statutes stipulating that “[the USSF] and its members are, to the extent permitted by
governing law, obliged to respect the statutes, regulations, directives and decisions of FIFA”,
never implemented the FIFA training categories system. However, since the Major League Soccer
(MLS), i.e. the first professional divisions in the USA, via press release dated 18 April 2019
announced that its affiliated clubs would seek training compensation claims and solidarity
payments, the Claimant deemed “unreasonable that the MLS and USSF affiliated clubs will start
to benefit from the FIFA training compensation system while their Category is still 4”.
5. Thus, the Claimant took into consideration:
a. The amount set for category IV clubs in CONCACAF, i.e. USD 2,000 per year for the
time the player was registered with during the course of the season of his 14th and 15th
birthdays; and
b. The amount set for category III clubs in CONCACAF, i.e. USD 10,000 per year for the
time the player was registered with during the course of the season of his 16th, 17th,
18th and 20th birthdays.
6. The Respondent did not reply to the claim.
7. The FIFA administration requested the TTFA to provide clarification as to the player’s career
history in Trinidad and Tobago, and more particularly to provide the start and end date of each
of the player’s registrations with the above clubs. On 1 April 2021, the TTFA confirmed that the
player was registered as follows:
a. From 25 March 2013 until 20 June 16 with W-Connection as an amateur (permanent);
b. From 21 June 2016 until 14 May 2018 with Marabella Crisis Centre as an amateur
(permanent); and
c. From 14 May 2018 until 31 December 2018 with W-Connection as a professional
(permanent).
II. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS
Applicable law: Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (RSTP): June 2019 edition.
Rules Governing the Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the
Dispute Resolution Chamber (Procedural Rules): January 2021 edition.
Jurisdiction: Yes, uncontested
Admissibility: Yes, uncontested
Decision:
1. The claim of the Claimant is based on the subsequent registration of the player as a professional
with the Respondent.
2. The Respondent did not reply to the claim, thus the allegations of the Claimant remained
uncontested.
3. It is established through the player passport provided by the TTFA and the TTFA additional
confirmation of 1 April 2021 that the player:
a. Was permanently registered as an amateur with the Claimant as from 25 March 2013
until 20 June 16;
b. Was permanently registered as an amateur with Marabella Crisis Centre as from 21
June 2016 until 14 May 2018; and
c. Was permanently registered as a professional with the Claimant as from 14 May 2018
until 31 December 2018.
4. Since the TTFA football seasons do not follow a 12-month pattern and do not have consistent
start and end dates, these seasons shall be considered to follow the calendar year. Thus, the
player was registered with the Claimant during:
a. 283 days of the season of the player’s 12th birthday, i.e. from 25 March 2013 until 31
December 2013;
b. The entire season of the player’s 13th birthday, i.e. from 1 January 2014 until 31
December 2014;
c. The entire season of the player’s 14th birthday, i.e. from 1 January 2015 until 31
December 2015;
d. 171 days of the season of the player’s 15th birthday, i.e. from 1 January 2016 until 20
June 2016; and
e. 231 days of the season of the player’s 17th birthday, i.e. from 14 May 2018 until 31
December 2018.
5. According to the TTFA player passport, the contents of which were confirmed to accurately
represent the career history of the player in Trinidad and Tobago, it is established that the player:
a. Was permanently registered as an amateur with the Claimant;
b. Moved permanently to another club, Marabella Crisis Centre, as an amateur; and
c. And then registered permanently once again with the Claimant as a professional.
6. It is uncontested that the player registered as a professional with the Respondent on 18 March
2019, during the course of the season of his 18th birthday.
7. In view of the above, it is determined that since the player was already a professional with the
Claimant since 14 May 2018, the player subsequently registered as a professional with the
Respondent.
8. In accordance with art. 3 par. 1 of Annexe 4 RSTP, for subsequent transfers of the professional,
the club with which the player is registered is responsible for paying training compensation
within 30 days of registration only to his former club for the time he was effectively trained by
that club.
9. The Respondent was classified as a training category IV club upon registering the player as a
professional.
10. According to art. 2 par. 2 lit. ii) of Annexe 4 RSTP, no training compensation is due to the former
club of the player when said player was subsequently registered with a category IV club.
11. Thus, no training compensation is in principle due to the Claimant.
12. Nevertheless, the Claimant argued that the Respondent was wrongly categorised by the USSF,
in view of the fact that the USSF did not apply the training category system to its members.
What is more, the Claimant argued that since clubs affiliated to the USSF officially started to
seek training rewards, US professional clubs’ categories shall be reviewed. In this respect, the
Claimant was of the opinion that the Respondent’s category should be considered a category III
club since the Respondent was a professional competing in the second tier of professional
football in the USA.
13. According to art. 5 par. 4 of Annexe 4 of the Regulations, the Dispute Resolution Chamber
(DRC) “may review disputes concerning the amount of training compensation payable and shall
have discretion to adjust the amount if it is clearly disproportionate to the case under review.”
14. FIFA Circular 1249 of 6 December 2010 stipulated that in principle, clubs shall be categorized
by their respective member associations according to the following principles:
a. Category I (top-level, high-quality training centre): All first-division clubs of member
associations investing, on average, a similar amount in training players;
b. Category II (still professional, but at a lower level): All second-division clubs of member
associations in category I and all first-division clubs in all other countries with
professional football;
c. Category III: All third-division clubs of member associations in category I and all seconddivision
clubs in all other countries with professional football;
d. Category IV: All fourth- and lower-division clubs of the member associations in category
I, all third- and lower-division clubs in all other countries with professional football and
all clubs in countries with only amateur football.
15. What is more, FIFA Circular 1249 stipulated that “in such a case of manifest discrepancy, the
DRC normally applies the training categories in accordance with the guidelines, despite the fact
that the member association concerned had indicated a different categorisation”.
16. According to FIFA Circular 1627 of 9 May 2018, CONCACAF member associations may classify
their clubs between three training categories, i.e.:
a. Category II, with training costs of USD 40,000 per year;
b. Category III, with training costs of USD 10,000 per year; and
c. Category IV, with training costs of USD 2,000 per year.
17. In the present case, the USSF as member of the CONCACAF has in principle access to the above
three training categories to classify its affiliated clubs.
18. It is uncontested that the MLS corresponds to the first professional division in the USA, and the
USL Championship is the second professional division in the USA.
19. It is uncontested that the Respondent competes in the USL Championship.
20. In view of the above, the Respondent shall be considered a training category III club, which is
the category reserved to all third-division clubs of member associations in category I and all
second-division clubs in all other countries with professional football as per FIFA Circular 1249
in combination with FIFA Circular 1627.
21. Consequently, training compensation is due to the Claimant on the basis of the subsequent
professional registration of the player with the Respondent.
22. Art. 3 par. 1 of Annexe 4 RSTP stipulates that for subsequent transfers of the professional, the
club with which the player is registered is responsible for paying training compensation within
30 days of registration only to his former club for the time he was effectively trained by that
club.
23. In other words, in case of subsequent professional registration of a player, only the last club
where the player was registered as a professional is entitled to receive training compensation for
the time it had the player under permanent registration before it subsequently registered with
the next professional club.
24. The DRC has previously established that a former club in the sense of art. 3 par. 1 Annexe 4
RSTP refers only to the last uninterrupted segment of registration of the player with his previous
club (loan(s) excluded).
25. If during this last uninterrupted segment of registration, the player was first an amateur and
then a professional with the former club, said segment would comprise both the amateur and
professional registration periods.
26. In addition, it was determined that the first registration of a professional player with a club
affiliated to the same association than his previous training clubs broke the chain of entitlement
since those clubs would in principle receive rewards for the training and education provided to
the player at national level, as per art. 2 par. 2 RSTP.
27. In casu, the Claimant broke the chain of training compensation entitlement to any of the
previous clubs in Trinidad and Tobago when registering the player as a professional on 14 May
2018.
28. As established in point II. 3. to 7. above, the player:
a. Was permanently registered with the Claimant as from 25 March 2013 until 20 June
2016 as an amateur;
b. Was permanently registered with Marabella Crisis Centre as from 21 June 2016 until
14 May 2018 as an amateur;
c. Was permanently registered with the Claimant as a professional as from 14 May 2018
until 31 December 2018; and
d. Subsequently transferred as a professional from the Claimant to the Respondent on 18
March 2019.
29. In view of the above, the last segment of registration of the player prior to his subsequent
registration as a professional with the Respondent corresponds to his registration with the
Claimant as from 14 May 2018 until 31 December 2018.
30. As such, it is determined that the Claimant is entitled is to receive training compensation for the
time the player was registered with it during the course of year 2018 only.
31. In fact, the period for which the player was registered with the Claimant as an amateur was
interrupted by his permanent registration with Marabella Crisis Centre, therefore, in line with
the above jurisprudence of the DRC, this segment cannot be taken into account in the context
of the subsequent professional registration of the player with the Respondent.
32. The potential lack of training reward system in Trinidad and Tobago cannot be held against the
Respondent.
33. In accordance with art. 5 par. 2 of Annexe 4 RSTP, in the case of subsequent transfers, training
compensation is calculated based on the training costs of the new club multiplied by the number
of years of training with the former club.
34. As established under point. II. 20., the Respondent is considered to be a training category III club.
Training costs for category III clubs within CONCACAF are set at USD 10,000 per year.
35. Art. 3 par. 1 of Annexe 4 RSTP stipulates that the amount payable of training compensation is
calculated on a pro rata basis according to the period of training that the player spent with each
club.
36. As established under point II. 4., the player was registered with the Claimant for 231 days of the
season of the player’s 17th birthday, i.e. from 14 May 2018 until 31 December 2018.
37. Consequently, on the basis of the subsequent registration of the player as a professional with
the Respondent, the Claimant is entitled to receive training compensation in the amount of USD
6,328.77 for the training and education provided to the player during the course of the season
of his 17th birthday.
38. Furthermore, the Claimant requested to be awarded interest amounting to 5% per annum, “as
per the due date”.
39. Taking into consideration the Claimant’s claim as well as art. 3 par. 2 of Annexe 4 RSTP, the
Respondent has to pay, in conformity with the longstanding practice of the DRC, interest of 5%
p.a. over the amount payable as training compensation as of 31 days after the registration of
the player with it, i.e. as from 18 April 2019 until the date of effective payment.
40. In view of all the above, the claim of the Claimant is partially accepted and the Claimant is
entitled to receive USD 6,328.77 as training compensation, plus 5% interest p.a. on that
amount, as from 18 April 2019 until the date of effective payment.
41. Any further claim of the Claimant is rejected.
42. No procedural costs are payable (cf. arts. 17 par. 1 and 18 par. 1 lit. i) of the Rules Governing
the Procedure of the Players’ Status Committee and Dispute Resolution Chamber).
43. The relevant provisions of art. 24bis RSTP are applicable to the present matter.
III. DECISION
1. The claim of the Claimant, W-Connection, is partially accepted.
2. The Respondent, Charleston Battery, has to pay to the Claimant USD 6,328.77 as training
compensation, plus 5% interest p.a. on that amount, as from 18 April 2019 until the date of
effective payment.
3. Any further claim of the Claimant is rejected.
4. The Claimant shall immediately inform the Respondent of the bank account to which the
Respondent must pay the due amount (including all applicable interest).
5. The Respondent shall provide evidence of full payment to psdfifa@fifa.org. If applicable, the
evidence shall be translated into an official FIFA language (English, French, German, Spanish).
6. If the due amount (including all applicable interest) is not paid by the Respondent within 45 days
as from notification of the bank account details, the following consequences shall apply:
1.
2.
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 ban will be lifted immediately, and prior to its complete serving, following confirmation
that the due amount (including all applicable interest) has been received by the Claimant.
3.
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.
7. No procedural costs are payable (cf. arts. 17 par. 1 and 18 par. 1 lit. i) of the Rules Governing the
Procedure of the Players’ Status Committee and Dispute Resolution Chamber).
For the Single Judge of the sub-committee of the DRC:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
NOTE RELATED TO THE APPEAL PROCEDURE:
Pursuant to article 58 paragraph 1 of the FIFA Statutes, this decision may be appealed before the Court
of Arbitration for Sport within 21 days of notification.
NOTE RELATED TO 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