F.I.F.A. – Camera di Risoluzione delle Controversie (2015-2016) – indennità di formazione – ———-F.I.F.A. – Dispute Resolution Chamber (2015-2016) – training compensation – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) judge passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 26 November 2015, by Philippe Diallo (France), DRC judge, on the claim presented by the club, Club A, country B, as Claimant against the club, Club C, country D as Respondent regarding training compensation in connection with the Player E I.

F.I.F.A. - Camera di Risoluzione delle Controversie (2015-2016) - indennità di formazione – ----------F.I.F.A. - Dispute Resolution Chamber (2015-2016) - training compensation – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) judge passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 26 November 2015, by Philippe Diallo (France), DRC judge, on the claim presented by the club, Club A, country B, as Claimant against the club, Club C, country D as Respondent regarding training compensation in connection with the Player E I. Facts of the case 1. The Football Association of country B confirmed that the player, Player E (hereinafter: the player), born on 1 July 1991, was registered as an amateur with the following clubs from country B: Club Registration dates Club F From 1 July 2003 until 30 June 2004 From 1 July 2004 until 30 June 2005 From 6 August 2005 until 30 June 2006 From 1 July 2006 until 30 June 2007 From 1 July 2007 until 30 June 2008 From 1 July 2008 until 30 June 2009 From 1 July 2009 until 30 June 2010 From 1 July 2010 until 1 August 2010 Club G (on loan from Club F) From 2 August 2010 until 30 June 2011 Club H From 18 August 2011 until 15 December 2011 Club I From 28 January 2012 until 30 June 2012 Club J From 10 August 2012 until 16 December 2012 Club K From 4 January 2013 until 30 June 2013 2. The football season in country B lasts from 1 July until 30 June of the following year. 3. The Football Association of country B confirmed that Club G changed its name to Club A (hereinafter: the Claimant) on 21 July 2011, without losing its affiliation to the Football Association of country B and that the Claimant belonged to the category 4 (indicative amount of EUR 10,000 per year within UEFA) during the season when the player was registered with the club. 4. According to the information provided by the Football Federation of country D, the player was registered with its affiliated Club C (hereinafter: the Respondent) on 12 December 2013 as a professional. Equally, according to the information contained in the Transfer Matching System (TMS), the Football Association of country B delivered the ITC of the player in favour to the Football Federation of country D on 2 September 2013, indicating Club K as the player’s last club. 5. The Football Federation of country D confirmed that the Respondent belonged to the category 2 (indicative amount of EUR 60,000 per year within UEFA) during the season when the player was registered with the club. 6. On 7 October 2014, the Claimant contacted FIFA requesting training compensation on the ground that the player had signed his first professional contract with the Respondent, claiming the amount of EUR 31,931 as well as unspecified interest. 7. In spite of having been invited to do so, the Respondent never replied to the Claimant’s claim. II. Considerations of the DRC judge 1. First of all, the Dispute Resolution Chamber judge (hereinafter also referred to as 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 7 October 2014. Consequently, the 2014 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 2014 and 2015 editions of the Procedural Rules). 2. Subsequently, the DRC judge referred to art. 3 par. 1 and 2 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 2015), 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 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 2012, 2014 and 2015), and considering that the player was registered with the Respondent on 12 December 2013, the 2012 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. His competence 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. However, he emphasized 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 DRC judge took note that the Claimant maintained that it is entitled to receive training compensation from the Respondent in the amount of EUR 31,931, indicating that the player had signed his first professional contract with the Respondent before the end of the season of his 23rd birthday. 6. Furthermore, the DRC judge duly noted that the Respondent never took position as to the substance in the present matter, although having been invited to do so by FIFA. Therefore, the DRC judge deemed that, in this way, the Respondent renounced to its right to defence and accepted the allegations of the Claimant. 7. As a consequence of the aforementioned 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. 8. Having established the above, the DRC judge referred to the rules applicable to cases regarding training compensation and stated that, as established in art. 20 of the Regulations as well as in art. 2 par. 1 of Annexe 4 of the Regulations, training compensation is payable, as a general rule, when a player is registered for the first time as a professional before the end of the season of the player’s 23rd birthday or when a professional is transferred between clubs of two different associations before the end of the season of the player’s 23rd birthday. In case the player is registered for the first time as a professional, art. 3 par. 1 sent. 1 of Annexe 4 of the Regulations sets forth that the club with which the player is registered is responsible for paying training compensation within 30 days of registration 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. 9. The aforementioned having been established, the DRC judge then referred to art. 6 of Annexe 4 of the Regulations, which contains special provisions regarding players moving from one association to another association inside the territory of the European Union (EU)/European Economic Area (EEA). In this regard, the DRC judge indicated that, since the player moved from one association to another association inside the territory of the EU, said article is applicable. Hence, the DRC judge concluded that art. 6 par. 3 of Annexe 4 of the Regulations applies in the case at hand as lex specialis. 10. However, in this regard, the DRC judge pointed out that, in casu, a possible obligation to offer the player a contract in compliance with art. 6 par. 3 of Annexe 4 of the Regulations would in principle lie with the former club of the player (i.e. Club K, cf. point I.1 above) and not with the Claimant. As stated in art. 6 par. 3 of Annexe 4 of the Regulations, said provision is without prejudice to the right of training compensation of the player’s previous club(s). 11. On account of the above considerations, the DRC judge decided that the Respondent is liable to pay training compensation to the Claimant. 12. Turning his attention to the calculation of training compensation, the DRC judge recalled that the player was born on 1 July 1991 and was registered with the Claimant as from 2 August 2010 until 30 June 2011 as an amateur. 13. Equally, the DRC judge recalled that the Football Federation of country D confirmed that the player was registered with the Respondent on 12 December 2013 as a professional. 14. On account of the above and in accordance with art. 20 in combination with Annexe 4 of the Regulations, the DRC judge considered that the Claimant is, thus, entitled to receive training compensation for the period as from 2 August 2010 until 30 June 2011. 15. In view of all of the above and taking into account the amount claimed, the DRC judge decided to accept the claim of the Claimant and held that the Respondent is liable to pay the amount of EUR 31,931 to the Claimant as training compensation in relation to the first professional registration of the player with the Respondent. 16. Moreover, taking into consideration the Claimant’s claim as well as art. 3 par. 2 of Annexe 4 of the Regulations, the DRC judge decided that the Respondent has to pay interest of 5% p.a. over the amount payable as training compensation as of 7 October 2014. 17. Lastly, the DRC 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 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 Annex A of the Procedural Rules, the costs of the proceedings are to be levied on the basis of the amount in dispute. 18. In respect of the above, the DRC judge held that the amount to be taken into consideration in the present proceedings is EUR 31,931 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 Annex A). 19. As a result, and taking into account that the case at hand did not compose any complex factual or legal issues as well as considering that the Respondent never took stance in the procedure, the DRC judge determined the costs of the current proceedings to the amount of CHF 5,000, 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 C, has to pay to the Claimant, within 30 days as of the date of notification of the present decision, the amount of EUR 31,931 plus 5% interest p.a. on said amount as of 7 October 2014 until the date of effective payment. 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. The final costs of the proceedings in the amount of CHF 5,000 are to be paid by the Respondent, within 30 days of notification of the present decision to FIFA to the following bank account with reference to case nr. XXXX: 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 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: Markus Kattner Acting Secretary General Enclosed: CAS directives