F.I.F.A. – Camera di Risoluzione delle Controversie (2012-2013) – indennità di formazione – ———- F.I.F.A. – Dispute Resolution Chamber (2012-2013) – training compensation – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) judge passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 6 March 2013, by Theo van Seggelen (Netherlands), DRC judge, on the claim presented by the club, Club A, from country B as Claimant against the club Club D, from country C as Respondent regarding training compensation in connection with the Player E

F.I.F.A. - Camera di Risoluzione delle Controversie (2012-2013) - indennità di formazione – ---------- F.I.F.A. - Dispute Resolution Chamber (2012-2013) - training compensation – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) judge passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 6 March 2013, by Theo van Seggelen (Netherlands), DRC judge, on the claim presented by the club, Club A, from country B as Claimant against the club Club D, from country C 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 from country B the player, Player E (hereinafter: player), born on 5 September 1991, was registered with the club from country B, Club A (hereinafter: Claimant), as from 26 June 2007 until 30 October 2008 as an amateur. Furthermore, the player passport indicated that the player had previously been registered as an amateur with the club from country B, Club F, as from 6 January 2003 until 25 June 2007. The Football Federation from country B confirmed in writing that after 30 October 2008, the player was not registered with another club at the Football Federation from country B. Furthermore, the International Transfer Certificate (ITC) for the player was issued by the Football Federation from country B to the Football Federation from country C on 15 January 2010. 2. The Football Federation from country B confirmed that the relevant sporting seasons in country B ran as from 1 January until 30 October. 3. According to a written confirmation of the Football Federation from country C, the player was registered with its affiliated club, Club D (hereinafter: Respondent), on 15 January 2010 as a professional. 4. The Football Federation from country C further confirmed that the Respondent belonged to the category I at the time the player was registered with the Respondent. 5. On 8 February 2012, the Claimant contacted FIFA claiming the payment of training compensation from the Respondent on the basis that the player signed his first professional contract with the Respondent on 15 January 2010. In particular, the Claimant is claiming, based on an alleged agreement with the Respondent, training compensation in the amount of EUR 36,600. 6. In spite of having been invited to present its position on the claim of the Claimant, no reply has been received from the Respondent. II. Considerations of the DRC judge 1. First of all, the Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) judge analysed whether he was competent to deal with the case at hand. In this respect, he took note that the present matter was submitted to FIFA on 8 February 2012. Consequently, the Rules Governing the Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber, edition 2008 (hereinafter: Procedural Rules) are applicable to the matter at hand (cf. art. 21 par. 2 and 3 of the Procedural Rules). 2. Subsequently, the DRC judge referred to art. 3 par. 2 of the Procedural Rules and confirmed that in accordance with art. 24 par. 1 and par. 2 lit. ii. in combination with art. 22 lit. d) of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2012), the DRC judge is competent to deal with the matter at stake relating to training compensation between clubs belonging to different associations. 3. Furthermore, the DRC 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 2 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2012), and considering that the present claim was lodged on 8 February 2012 as well as that the player was registered with the Respondent on 15 January 2010, the 2009 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 DRC judge and the applicable regulations having been established, the DRC judge entered into the substance of the matter. The DRC judge started by acknowledging the facts of the case as well as the documentation on file. 5. First of all, the DRC judge recalled that the player was born on 5 September 1991 and was registered with the Claimant as from 26 June 2007 until 30 October 2008 as an amateur. 6. In continuation, the DRC judge took note that the Claimant maintained that it is entitled to receive training compensation from the Respondent in the amount of EUR 36,600, on the basis of the fact that the player was registered for the first time as a professional with the Respondent. 7. Furthermore, the DRC judge observed that the Respondent failed to present its response to the claim of the Claimant, despite having been invited to do so. In this way, so the DRC judge deemed, the Respondent renounced its right of defence and, thus, accepted the allegations of the Claimant. 8. As a consequence of the preceding consideration, the DRC judge established 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. 9. In this respect, the DRC judge first 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. i. 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 registered for the first time as a professional before the end of the season of the player’s 23rd birthday. In addition, according to art. 3 par. 1 of Annexe 4 of the Regulations, on registering as a professional for the first time, the club with which the player is registered is responsible for paying training compensation to every club with which the player has previously been registered and that has contributed to his training starting from the season of his 12th birthday. 10. In connection with the above, the DRC judge duly noted that the national association to which the Respondent is affiliated, i.e. the Football Federation from country C, had unequivocally confirmed that the player was registered with the Respondent as a professional on 15 January 2010. Taking into account the foregoing information as well as considering that the Respondent had not produced any evidence to the contrary, the DRC judge deemed that it could be established that the player was indeed registered as a professional with the Respondent. 11. In continuation, the DRC judge took into account that the Football Federation from country B confirmed that no records were available for the period after the player’s registration with the Claimant as an amateur, i.e. as of 30 October 2008. The DRC judge further noted that the ITC for the player was issued by the Football Federation from country B to the Football Federation from country C. In this context and considering the career history of the player, which indicated that at all time prior to the player’s registration with the Respondent, the player was registered as an amateur, the DRC judge determined that the player was registered for the first time as a professional with the Respondent before the end of the season of the player’s 23rd birthday. 12. On account of all the above considerations, the DRC judge 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 his attention to the calculation of the training compensation payable by the Respondent to the Claimant, the DRC judge referred to the FIFA circular no. 1185 dated 22 April 2009 which provides details for the calculation of training compensation as well as to art. 5 par. 1 and par. 2 of Annexe 4 of the Regulations, which stipulates that as a general rule, to calculate the training compensation due to a player’s former club, 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 DRC judge took into account that the Respondent belonged to the category I within UEFA and that the player, born on 5 September 1991, was registered with the Claimant as from 26 June 2007 until 30 October 2008. In view of the foregoing as well as, in particular, the amount claimed by the Claimant, the DRC judge decided that the Respondent has to pay the amount of EUR 36,600 to the Claimant as training compensation. 15. Lastly, the DRC judge referred to 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 Annexe A of the Procedural Rules, the costs of the proceedings are to be levied on the basis of the amount in dispute. 16. In respect of the above, the DRC judge held that the amount to be taken into consideration in the present proceedings is EUR 36,600 related to the claim of the Claimant. Consequently, the DRC judge concluded that the maximum amount of costs of the proceedings corresponds to CHF 5,000 (cf. table in Annexe A). 17. As a result, taking into account the particularities of the present matter, the number of issues that had to be addressed as well as that the Respondent was the unsuccessful party in the present proceedings, the DRC judge determined the costs of the current proceedings to the amount of CHF 2,500, which shall be borne by the Respondent. ***** III. Decision of the DRC judge 1. The claim of the Claimant, Club A, is accepted. 2. The Respondent, Club D, has to pay to Club A the amount of EUR 36,600 within 30 days as from the date of notification of this decision. 3. In the event that the aforementioned sum is not paid within the stated time limit, interest of 5% p.a. will fall due as of expiry of the stipulated time limit and the present matter shall be submitted, upon request, to FIFA’s Disciplinary Committee for consideration and a formal decision. 4. The final amount of costs of the proceedings, amounting to CHF 2,500, is to be paid within 30 days as from the date of notification of the present decision by the Respondent to FIFA to the following bank account with reference to case no.: UBS Zurich Account number 366.677.01U (FIFA Players’ Status) Clearing number 230 IBAN: CH27 0023 0230 3666 7701U SWIFT: UBSWCHZH80A 5. 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 DRC judge of every payment received. ***** Note relating to the motivated decision (legal remedy): According to art. 67 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 www.tas-cas.org For the DRC judge: Jérôme Valcke Secretary General Encl. CAS directives