F.I.F.A. – Camera di Risoluzione delle Controversie (2012-2013) – contributo di solidarietà – ———- F.I.F.A. – Dispute Resolution Chamber (2012-2013) – solidarity contribution – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 28 June 2013, in the following composition: Geoff Thompson (England), Chairman Jon Newman (USA), member Rinaldo Martorelli (Brazil), member Theodoros Giannikos (Greece), member Essah M. Saleh Al-Housani (United Arab Emirates), member on the claim presented by the Country B Football Union, from country B as Claimant against the club, Club M, from country T as Respondent regarding a solidarity contribution dispute related to the transfer of the player D

F.I.F.A. - Camera di Risoluzione delle Controversie (2012-2013) - contributo di solidarietà – ---------- F.I.F.A. - Dispute Resolution Chamber (2012-2013) - solidarity contribution – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 28 June 2013, in the following composition: Geoff Thompson (England), Chairman Jon Newman (USA), member Rinaldo Martorelli (Brazil), member Theodoros Giannikos (Greece), member Essah M. Saleh Al-Housani (United Arab Emirates), member on the claim presented by the Country B Football Union, from country B as Claimant against the club, Club M, from country T as Respondent regarding a solidarity contribution dispute related to the transfer of the player D I. Facts of the case 1. According to the player passport issued by the country B Football Union (hereinafter: the Claimant), Player D, from country B (hereinafter: the player), born in November 1989, was registered with Club P, from country B, as from 1 August 2001 until 29 June 2010. 2. The Claimant confirmed that Club P went bankrupt as per 1 August 2009 and is not anymore participating in any competition organized under the auspices of the Claimant since July 2011, nor affiliated to the Claimant since July 2012. 3. The football seasons in country B during the period of time the player was registered with Club P started on 1 July and ended on 30 June of the following year. 4. The country T Football Federation confirmed that the player was registered with Club M (hereinafter: the Respondent) on 13 January 2012. 5. On 21 December 2012, the country B Football Union contacted FIFA claiming the payment of solidarity contribution in connection with the transfer of the player concerned, on 12 January 2012, from Club S, to the Respondent, for the alleged amount of EUR 800,000, payable in four equal instalments of EUR 200,000, due on 12 January 2012, 30 March 2012, 30 June 2012 and 30 August 2012. In particular, the Claimant requested 70% of 5% of the alleged transfer compensation of EUR 800,000. 6. The Claimant indicated that the Respondent had already paid the amount of EUR 7,000 as solidarity contribution related to the first instalment. Therefore, the Claimant requested the amount of EUR 21,000 plus 5% interest p.a. as of 30 days after each due date. 7. According to the information contained in the Transfer Matching System (TMS), Club S and the Respondent agreed upon a transfer compensation of EUR 800,000, payable in four equal instalments of EUR 200,000 each, due on 12 January 2012, 30 March 2012, 30 June 2012 and 30 August 2012. 8. In reply to the Claimant’s claim, the Respondent stated that it had received over 30 pages written in a foreign language and, therefore, it would not be able to submit a proper defense within the given deadline. In this respect, on 18 March 2013, the Respondent requested a deadline extension until 10 April 2013. 9. In spite of having been granted a deadline extension by FIFA until 3 April 2013, the Respondent did not make any further statements during the course of the investigation. 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 21 December 2012. Consequently, the 2012 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 2012 edition 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 in combination with art. 22 lit. d) of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2012) the Dispute Resolution Chamber is competent to decide on the present matter relating to the solidarity mechanism between clubs belonging to different associations. 3. Furthermore, the Chamber analysed which regulations should be applicable as to the substance of the matter. In this respect, it confirmed that in accordance with art. 26 par. 1 and 2 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (editions 2010 and 2012), and considering that the player was registered with the Respondent on 13 January 2012, the 2010 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 Chamber 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 above-mentioned facts of the case as well as the documentation on file. 5. First of all, the Chamber noted that in the present case, it was a national association and not a club which claimed payment of the solidarity contribution. In this respect, the DRC took into account that the Claimant confirmed that Club P went bankrupt and irrefutably ceased to exist. Consequently, the Chamber decided that the Claimant is entitled to claim for Club P’s proportion of solidarity contribution. 6. In this respect, the DRC took note that the Claimant claimed a proportion of 70% of 5% of the alleged transfer compensation or EUR 800,000, equivalent to 28,000. Furthermore, the DRC Took due note that the Respondent had already paid the amount of EUR 7,000 to the Claimant. As a result, the Claimant claimed the payment of the amount of EUR 21,000. 7. Furthermore, the DRC noted that, even though it had been granted, upon request, a deadline extension in order to respond to the claim of the Claimant, the Respondent never took position in the specific matter. Therefore, the Chamber deemed that, in this way, the Respondent renounced to its right to defence and therefore accepted the allegations of the Claimant. 8. As a consequence of the aforementioned consideration, the Chamber established that, in accordance with art. 9 par. 3 of the Procedural Rules, it shall pass a decision upon the basis of the documents already on file, i.e. upon the statements and documents presented by the Claimant as well as upon the information contained in the TMS. 9. Having established the above, the DRC referred to art. 21 of the Regulations in combination with art. 1 of Annexe 5 of the Regulations which stipulate that, if a professional moves during the course of a contract, 5% of any compensation, not including training compensation paid to his former club, shall be deducted from the total amount of this compensation and be distributed by the new club as a solidarity contribution to the club(s) involved in the training and education of the player in proportion of the number of years the player has been registered with the relevant club(s) between the seasons of his 12th and 23rd birthday. 10. In this respect, the Chamber recalled again that the Respondent had not specifically replied to the claim of the Claimant and therefore ruled that the Respondent did not provide any argument which would justify the non-payment of the proportion of solidarity contribution to the Claimant. 11. Subsequently, the DRC considered that it had to determine which should be the relevant amount of the solidarity contribution to be paid by the Respondent to the Claimant. In this regard, the Chamber went on to establish the proper calculation of the relevant proportion of solidarity contribution due to the Claimant. 12. In this regard, the Chamber referred again to art. 21 of the Regulations and art. 1 of Annexe 5 of the Regulations which provide the figures for the distribution of the solidarity contribution, according to the period of time the player was effectively trained by a specific club and taking into consideration the age of the player at the time he was being training and educated by the club(s) concerned. 13. In this respect, the DRC recalled that, according to the player passport issued by the Claimant, the player, born in November 1989, was registered with Club P as from 1 August 2001 until 29 June 2009. 14. On account of the above and in accordance with art. 1 of Annexe 5 of the Regulations, the Chamber considered that the Claimant is, thus, entitled to receive solidarity contribution for the period as from 1 August 2001 until 29 June 2009, i.e. for 11 months of the season of the player’s 12th birthday and the full seasons of the player’s 13th until 20th birthday. In terms of the percentage of the 5% solidarity contribution, the Chamber calculated that, on a pro rata basis, this corresponds to 69.58% of 5%. 15. Furthermore, the Chamber referred to art. 2 par. 1 of Annexe 5 of the Regulations which stipulates that the new club shall pay the solidarity contribution to the training club(s) no later than 30 days after the player’s registration or, in case of contingent payments, 30 days after the date of such payments. 16. In this respect, the DRC recalled that the transfer compensation of EUR 800,000 is payable in four equal instalments of EUR 200,000. Consequently, the DRC held that the solidarity contribution for each instalment amounts to EUR 6,958, resulting in a total amount of EUR 27,832. Equally, the DRC recalled that the Respondent had already paid the amount of EUR 7,000 to the Claimant. Consequently, the Chamber decided that the Respondent must pay to the Claimant the amount of EUR 20,874. 17. Furthermore, and taking into consideration both the claim of the Claimant as well as art. 2 par. 1 of Annexe 5 of the Regulations, the Chamber decided that the Respondent has to pay, in conformity with the longstanding practice of the DRC, interest at the rate of 5% p.a. as follows: - 5% p.a. as of 30 April 2012 over the amount of EUR 6,958; - 5% p.a. as of 31 July 2012 over the amount of EUR 6,958; - 5% p.a. as of 30 September 2012 over the amount of EUR 6,958. 18. The Chamber concluded its deliberations as to the substance of the matter by rejecting any further claim of the Claimant. 19. Lastly, the Chamber referred to art. 18 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules, according to which, in proceedings before the DRC relating to disputes regarding training compensation and the solidarity mechanism, costs in the maximum amount of currency of country H 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, 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. 20. In respect of the above, the Chamber held that the amount to be taken into consideration in the present proceedings is EUR 21,000 related to the claim of the Claimant. Consequently, the Chamber concluded that the maximum amount of costs of the proceedings corresponds to currency of country H 5,000 (cf. table in Annexe A of the Procedural Rules). 21. As a result, considering that the case at hand did not pose any particular factual difficulties as well as considering that the Respondent never took stance in the procedure and taking into account the degree of success, the Chamber determined the final costs of the current proceedings to the amount of currency of country H 3,000, which shall be borne by the Respondent. ***** III. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber 1. The claim of the Claimant, the country B Football Union, is partially accepted. 2. The Respondent, Club M, has to pay to the Claimant, within 30 days as from the date of notification of this decision, the amount of EUR 20,874 plus interest at 5% p.a. until the date of effective payment as follows: - 5% p.a. as of 30 April 2012 over the amount of EUR 6,958; - 5% p.a. as of 31 July 2012 over the amount of EUR 6,958; - 5% p.a. as of 30 September 2012 over the amount of EUR 6,958. 3. If 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 currency of country H 3,000 are to be paid by the Respondent within 30 days as from the date of notification of the present decision, to FIFA to the following bank account with reference to case nr.: 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. 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 Dispute Resolution Chamber: Markus Kattner Deputy Secretary General Enclosed: CAS directives