F.I.F.A. – Camera di Risoluzione delle Controversie (2013-2014) – contributo di solidarietà – ———- F.I.F.A. – Dispute Resolution Chamber (2013-2014) – solidarity contribution – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 27 February 2014, in the following composition: Geoff Thompson (England), Chairman Todd Durbin (USA), member Mohamed Al Saikhan (Saudi Arabia), member Joaquim Evangelista (Portugal), member Leonardo Grosso (Italy), member on the claim presented by the club, Club I, from country G as Claimant against the club, Club D, from country U as Respondent regarding a solidarity contribution dispute related to the transfer of the player B

F.I.F.A. - Camera di Risoluzione delle Controversie (2013-2014) - contributo di solidarietà – ---------- F.I.F.A. - Dispute Resolution Chamber (2013-2014) - solidarity contribution – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 27 February 2014, in the following composition: Geoff Thompson (England), Chairman Todd Durbin (USA), member Mohamed Al Saikhan (Saudi Arabia), member Joaquim Evangelista (Portugal), member Leonardo Grosso (Italy), member on the claim presented by the club, Club I, from country G as Claimant against the club, Club D, from country U as Respondent regarding a solidarity contribution dispute related to the transfer of the player B I. Facts of the case 1. According to the player passport issued by the country G Football Association, the player, Player B (hereinafter: the player), born in May 1983, was registered with the Club I, from country G (hereinafter: the Claimant), as from 23 March 1995 until 25 March 1998. 2. The sporting season in country G during the period of time the player was registered with the Claimant ran as follows: - season 1995 as from 1 October 1995 until 27 April 1996; - season 1996 as from 1 December 1996 until 27 July 1997; - season 1997 as from 7 December 1997 until 13 September 1998. 3. The Football Federation of country U confirmed that the player was registered with Club D (hereinafter: the Respondent) on 8 July 2011. 4. According to the Claimant, Club G, from country S, concluded in July 2011 a transfer agreement with the Respondent, for the definitive transfer of the player. 5. On 27 July 2011, the Claimant contacted FIFA claiming its proportion of the solidarity contribution in connection with the transfer of the player concerned from country G to the Respondent for the alleged amount of EUR 5,000,000. In particular, the Claimant requested 15% of the 5% solidarity contribution, equivalent to EUR 37,500, as solidarity contribution, plus 5% interest p.a. as of 13 September 2011. 6. According to the information contained in the Transfer Matching System (TMS), Club G and the Respondent agreed upon a transfer compensation amounting to EUR 4,875,000 payable on 30 June 2011. 7. In spite of having been invited by FIFA to provide its position regarding the claim, the Respondent did not respond to the claim or make any statements at all 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 27 July 2011. Consequently, the 2008 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 par. 1 and 2 of the 2008 and 2012 editions 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 deal with the matter at stake relating to a dispute regarding the solidarity mechanism 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, 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 8 July 2011, 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 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. 5. First of all, the DRC took note that the Claimant claimed the payment of the amount of EUR 37,500 as solidarity contribution from the Respondent in relation with the transfer of the player from Club G to the Respondent for an alleged amount of EUR 5,000,000. 6. Furthermore, the DRC duly noted that the Respondent never took position in the present matter, although having been invited to do so by FIFA. Therefore, the DRC deemed that, in this way, the Respondent renounced its right of defence and accepted the allegations of the Claimant. 7. As a consequence of the aforementioned consideration, the DRC established that, in accordance with art. 9 par. 3 of the Procedural Rules, it shall take a decision upon the basis of the documents on file. 8. 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. 9. In this respect, the members of the Chamber recalled again that the Respondent had not 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. 10. 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 DRC went on to establish the proper calculation of the relevant proportion of solidarity contribution due to the Claimant. 11. To that end, the DRC referred to art. 1 of Annexe 5 of the Regulations which provides 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 trained and educated by the club(s) concerned. 12. In this respect, the DRC recalled that, according to the player passport issued by the country G Football Association, the player, born in May 1983, was registered with the Claimant as from 23 March 1995 until 25 March 1998. 13. On account of the above and in accordance with art. 1 of Annexe 5 of the Regulations, the DRC considered that the Claimant is, thus, entitled to receive solidarity contribution for the period as from 23 March 1995 until 25 March 1998. 14. Furthermore, the members of the Chamber recalled that, according to the information contained in TMS, Club G and the Respondent agreed upon a transfer compensation amounting to EUR 4,875,000. 15. In view of all the above, the DRC decided that the Respondent must pay to the Claimant the amount of EUR 36,562 plus default interest at a rate of 5% p.a. on the said amount as of 13 September 2011 until the date of effective payment. 16. Lastly, the DRC 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. 17. In respect of the above, the DRC held that the amount to be taken into consideration in the present proceedings is EUR 37,500 related to the claim of the Claimant. Consequently, the DRC 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). 18. As a result, considering that the case at hand did not pose any particular factual difficulties and taking into account the degree of success as well as that the Respondent never replied to the claim, the DRC determined the final costs of the current proceedings to the amount of currency of country H 4,000 which shall be borne by the Respondent. ***** III. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber 1. The claim of the Claimant, Club I, is partially accepted. 2. The Respondent, Club D, has to pay to the Claimant, within 30 days as from the date of notification of this decision, the amount of EUR 36,562 plus 5% interest p.a. on said amount as of 13 September 2011 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 currency of country H 4,000 are to be paid by the Respondent within 30 days as from the date of the 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: Jérôme Valcke Secretary General Enclosed: CAS directives