F.I.F.A. – Commissione per lo Status dei Calciatori (2014-2015) – controversie tra società – ———- F.I.F.A. – Players’ Status Committee (2014-2015) – club vs. club disputes – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 26 August 2014, by Geoff Thompson (England) Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee, on the claim presented by the club Club A, Country B as Claimant against the club Club C, Country D as Respondent regarding the reimbursement of the solidarity contribution relating to the player E

F.I.F.A. - Commissione per lo Status dei Calciatori (2014-2015) – controversie tra società – ---------- F.I.F.A. - Players’ Status Committee (2014-2015) – club vs. club disputes – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 26 August 2014, by Geoff Thompson (England) Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee, on the claim presented by the club Club A, Country B as Claimant against the club Club C, Country D as Respondent regarding the reimbursement of the solidarity contribution relating to the player E I. Facts of the case 1. On 15 June 2012, Club A from Country B (hereinafter: the Claimant), and Club C from Country D (hereinafter: the Respondent), concluded a transfer agreement for the transfer of the player, Player E (hereinafter: the player), born on 4 March 1986, from the Respondent to the Claimant for a transfer compensation amounting to USD 3,500,000 payable by no later than 15 July 2012. 2. On 11 June 2014, the Claimant lodged a claim in front of FIFA against the Respondent for reimbursement of the relevant amount of solidarity contribution indicating that it omitted to deduct 5% relating to solidarity mechanism and, thus, paid 100% of the transfer compensation to the Respondent. The Claimant explained that it had paid USD 95,791.50 as solidarity contribution to Club H from Country D, on 9 April 2014. In view of the foregoing, the Claimant requested the payment of USD 95,791.50 from the Respondent. 3. 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. 4. According to the player passport provided by the Football Association of Country D, the player, born on 4 March 1986, was registered with Club H from Country D, from 14 February 2002 until 24 August 2006 and from 5 February 2007 until 17 January 2008. The sporting seasons in Country D during the period that the player was registered with the aforementioned club follows the calendar year. II. Considerations of the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee 1. First of all, the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee (hereinafter: the Single Judge) analysed which Procedural Rules were applicable to the matter at hand. In this respect, he referred to art. 21 of the Rules Governing the Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber (edition 2012 and 2014) as well as to the fact that the present matter was submitted to FIFA on 11 June 2014, thus after 1 December 2012 but before 1 August 2014. Therefore, the Single Judge concluded that the 2012 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. 2. Subsequently, the Single Judge analysed which edition of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players is applicable as to the substance of the matter. In this respect, he referred, on the one hand, to art. 26 par. 1 and 2 of the 2012 and 2014 edition of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players and, on the other hand, to the fact that the claim was lodged in front of FIFA on 11 June 2014. In view of the foregoing, the Single Judge concluded that the 2012 edition of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (hereinafter: the Regulations) is applicable to the case at hand as to the substance. 3. Furthermore, the Single Judge confirmed that, on the basis of art. 3 par. 1 and par. 2 of the Procedural Rules in connection with art. 23 par. 1 and par. 3 as well as art. 22 lit. f) of the Regulations, he was competent to deal with the present matter since it concerned a dispute between two clubs affiliated to two different associations. 4. The competence of the Single Judge and the applicable regulations having been established, and entering into the substance of the matter, the Single Judge started by acknowledging 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. 5. First of all, the Single Judge took note that the Claimant maintained that it is entitled to the reimbursement of the relevant amount of solidarity contribution, i.e. USD 95,791.50, by the Respondent, indicating that it omitted to deduct 5% relating to solidarity mechanism and, thus, paid 100% of the transfer compensation to the Respondent. 6. Furthermore, the Single Judge stressed that the Respondent never took position in the present matter, although having been invited to do so by FIFA. Therefore, the Single Judge 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 Single 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 on file. 8. Subsequently, the Single Judge referred to art. 21 and art. 1 of Annexe 5 of the Regulations, the latter clearly stipulating 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 distributed by the new club as a solidarity contribution (…) “ (emphasis added). 9. With due consideration to the above, the Single Judge referred to the wellestablished jurisprudence of the Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) with regard to cases in which the player’s new club does not withhold 5% of the agreed transfer compensation when paying such transfer compensation, but nevertheless is asked to distribute solidarity contribution to the player’s training clubs. 10. According to the mentioned jurisprudence, the player’s new club is ordered to remit the relevant proportion(s) of the 5% solidarity contribution to the club(s) involved in the player’s training and education in strict application of art. 21 and art. 1 and art. 2 of Annexe 5 of the Regulations. At the same time, according to said well-established jurisprudence, the player’s former club is ordered to reimburse the same proportion(s) of the 5% of the compensation that it received from the player’s new club. 11. As a consequence, while emphasizing once more that the Respondent had not contested the allegations of the Claimant, the Single Judge considered that the Claimant is entitled to the reimbursement by the Respondent of the amount the Claimant effectively paid as solidarity contribution in accordance with the applicable Regulations. 12. On account of all the above, the Single Judge decided that the Respondent has to reimburse the amount of USD 95,791.50 to the Claimant. 13. 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 Players’ Status Committee including its Single Judge, costs in the maximum amount of CHF 25’000 are levied. The relevant provision further states that the costs are to be borne in consideration of the parties’ degree of success in the proceedings (cf. art. 18 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules). 14. In respect of the above, and taking into account that the Claimant is the successful party in the present proceedings, the Single Judge concluded that the Respondent has to bear the full costs of the current proceedings before FIFA. 15. Furthermore and according to Annexe A of the Procedural Rules, the costs of the proceedings are to be levied on the basis of the amount in dispute. On that basis, the Single Judge held that the amount to be taken into consideration in the present proceedings is USD 95,791.50. Consequently, the Single Judge concluded that the maximum amount of costs of the proceedings corresponds to CHF 10,000. 16. In conclusion, taking into account the degree of success as well as that the Respondent never took stance in the procedure, the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee determined the costs of the current proceedings to CHF 10,000, which shall be borne by the Respondent. ***** III. Decision of the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee 1. The claim of the Claimant, Club A, is 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 USD 95,791.50. 3. If the aforementioned sum is not paid within the stated time limit, interest at the rate 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 costs of the proceedings in the amount of CHF 10,000 are to be paid by the Respondent within 30 days as from the date of notification of the present decision as follows: 4.1. The amount of CHF 8,000 has to be paid to FIFA to the following bank account with reference to case nr.: UBS Zurich Account number 366.677.01U (FIFA Players’ Status) Clearing number 230 IBAN: CH27 0023 0230 3666 7701U SWIFT: UBSWCHZH80A 4.2. The amount of CHF 2,000 has to be paid directly to the Claimant. 5. The Claimant is directed to inform the Respondent immediately and directly of the account number to which the remittances under point 2. and 4.2. above are to be made and to notify the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee of every payment received. ***** Note relating to the motivated decision (legal remedy): According to article 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 Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee: Jérôme Valcke Secretary General Encl. CAS Directives