Training Compensation
Texto da decisão
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 15 March 2013
in the following composition:
Geoff Thompson (England), Chairman
Joaquim Evangelista (Portugal), member
Carlos Soto (Chile), member
Mario Gallavotti (Italy), member
Zola Majavu (South Africa), member
on the claim presented by the club,
Club A, from country B
as Claimant
against the club,
Club F, from country S
as Respondent
regarding a training compensation dispute
related to the transfer of the player L
I.
Facts of the case
1.
According to the player passport issued by the country B Football Association the player
L (hereinafter: the player), born in November 1990, was registered with Club A, from
country B (hereinafter: the Claimant) as from 9 March 2010 until 24 January 2011 as an
amateur.
2.
The sporting season in country B follows the calendar year.
3.
According to a written confirmation of the country S Football Association the player
was registered with the Club F, from country S (hereinafter: the Respondent), on
1 February 2011 as a professional.
4.
The country S Football Association confirmed that the Respondent belonged to the
category III (indicative amount of EUR 30,000 per year within UEFA).
5.
On 2 September 2011, the Claimant contacted FIFA asking for its proportion of training
compensation from the Respondent. In particular, the Claimant is requesting
EUR 26,175 “plus an interest rate calculated since the date in which the payment should
be made, which is 30 days after his registration with the country S Football Association”
as well as procedural costs.
6.
In its reply to the claim, the Respondent held that it should not be held liable to pay any
amount corresponding to training compensation in connection with the transfer at
hand. In particular, it referred to a “contract on mediation and cooperation” concluded
on 1 January 2011 between the Respondent and “Mr H, Scouting, consultancy”.
According to art. II of the aforementioned contract “The mediator is committed to the
Club F will have no financial costs associated with engaging the player (such as training
compensation, solidarity payment, the amount of a transfer fee and other fees). In the
event that Club F incurred unexpected financial costs associated with engaging the
above player, the mediator declares that all such costs”.
7.
Bearing in mind the aforementioned article, the Respondent claims that it should not
be obliged to pay training compensation in connection with the present transfer and
that “the only person who has obligation to pay training compensation in the relevant
case in accordance with the terms of contract on mediation is: Mr. H – Scouting,
consultancy”, who should equally pay the relevant procedural costs.
Training Compensation for the player L
(Club A, from country B / Club F, from country S)
2
II. Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
First of all, the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: the Chamber or DRC) 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 2 September 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. 2 and 3 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 (editions 2009 and 2010),
the Dispute Resolution Chamber is competent to deal with the matter at stake relating
to training compensation 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, taking into consideration that the player was registered with the Respondent
on 1 February 2011 as well as the fact that the present claim was lodged on
2 September 2011, it confirmed that in accordance with art. 26 par. 1 and 2 of the
Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (editions 2009 and 2010), 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 and, in this respect,
it started by acknowledging the above-mentioned facts of the case as well as the
documentation on file.
5.
First of all, the Chamber recalled that, according to the player passport issued by the
country B Football Association, the player was born on 29 November 1990 and was
registered with the Claimant as from 9 March 2010 until 24 January 2011 as an amateur.
6.
Moreover, the Chamber noted that, as confirmed by the country S Football Association ,
the player was registered with the Respondent on 1 February 2011 as a professional.
7.
In continuation, the Chamber took note that, on 2 September 2011, the Claimant
lodged a claim against the Respondent, requesting from the latter the payment of
training compensation for the period of 9 March 2010 until 24 January 2011, in the
amount of EUR 26,175 “plus an interest rate calculated since the date in which the
Training Compensation for the player L
(Club A, from country B / Club F, from country S)
3
payment should be made, which is 30 days after his registration with the country S
Football Association” as well as procedural costs.
8.
Equally, the DRC noted that the Respondent, based on the “contract on mediation and
cooperation” signed on 1 January 2011 between the Respondent and Mr H, Scouting,
consultancy and in particular on its art. II, rejected the Claimant’s claim and asserted
that it should not be held responsible for the payment of any amount related to
training compensation in connection with the transfer at hand and that the agent Mr H
would be responsible to pay training compensation to the Claimant, since he assured by
signing the “contract on mediation and cooperation” that no financial costs such as
training compensation would arise in connection with the transfer of the player.
9.
In this context and hereby referring to the rules applicable to training compensation,
the Chamber stated that, as established in art. 1 par. 1 of Annexe 4 in combination with
art. 2 lit. i of Annexe 4 of said 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 football player before the end of the
season of his 23rd birthday.
10.
Moreover, the DRC recalled that in accordance with art. 3 par. 1 and par. 2 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 to pay 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.
11.
In this regard, the Chamber emphasized that, in strict application of the rules pertaining
to training compensation, it is thus the new club of the player who is responsible for the
payment of training compensation to the previous clubs of the player that have in fact
trained him.
12.
At this point, the Chamber deemed it appropriate to recall the circumstances of the
present case, in particular the argumentation of the Respondent, according to which it
should not be held responsible to pay training compensation to the Claimant, since as
per the “contract on mediation and cooperation” of 1 January 2011, such responsibility
should be borne by Mr H, Scouting, consulting.
13.
In this context, the DRC also recalled the particular wording of art. II of the “contract on
mediation and cooperation”, which stipulates that “The mediator is committed to the
Club F will have no financial costs associated with engaging the player (such as training
compensation, solidarity payment, the amount of a transfer fee and other fees). In the
Training Compensation for the player L
(Club A, from country B / Club F, from country S)
4
event that the Club F incurred unexpected financial costs associated with engaging the
above player, the mediator declares that all such costs”.
14.
In view of the aforementioned regulations and of the particular context of the present
case, the members of the Chamber found it vital to underline that the obligation of the
new club towards the previous club(s) to pay training compensation cannot be
transferred to a third party by means of a private agreement which disposes of a right
of the Claimant established in the FIFA Regulations. In other words, any obligation
transferred to a third party in virtue of an agreement, which in any case shall have
effect inter partes, i.e. between the parties to this agreement, cannot discharge the new
club of its obligation to distribute training compensation to the training club(s).
15.
In this respect, the DRC considered that the agreement which the Respondent had
concluded with Mr H in the present matter could not be held against the Claimant nor
set aside the relevant provisions regarding training compensation contained in the
Regulations, which, amongst other, establish that on registering a professional for the
first time, the club with which the player is registered is responsible for paying training
compensation (cf. art 3 par. 1 of Annexe 4 of the Regulations). Thus, the DRC concluded
that the argumentation of the Respondent could not be sustained and, consequently,
had to be rejected.
16.
Therefore, and since it was undisputed by the parties that the player was registered for
the first time as a professional with the Respondent before the end of the season of his
23rd birthday, the Chamber decided that the Respondent is liable to pay training
compensation to the Claimant in accordance with art. 20 and art. 2 par. 1 lit. i. in
conjunction with art. 3 par. 1 of Annexe 4 of the Regulations.
17.
Turning its attention to the calculation of training compensation due to the Claimant by
the Respondent, the Chamber referred to art. 5 par. 1 and 2 of the Annexe 4 of the
Regulations, which stipulate that, as a general rule, it is necessary to take into
consideration the costs that would have been incurred by the new club as if it had
trained the player itself and thus, it is calculated based on the training costs of the new
club multiplied by the number of years of training with the former club.
18.
In this respect, the members of the Chamber duly noted that, according to the
documentation on file, it would be established that the player in question, born on
29 November 1990, had been registered with the Claimant as from 9 March 2010 until
24 January 2011 as an amateur and that on 1 February 2011 he was registered for the
first time as a professional with the Respondent, which belonged to category III
(indicative amount of EUR 30,000 per year within UEFA).
Training Compensation for the player L
(Club A, from country B / Club F, from country S)
5
19.
Additionally, and considering art. 3 par. 1 of Annexe 4 of the Regulations, which
stipulates that the amount payable is calculated on a pro rata basis according to the
period of training that the player spent with each club, the Chamber concluded that the
effective period of time to be considered in the matter at stake corresponds to
11 months.
20.
Consequently and taking into account all the above-mentioned elements as well as the
Claimant’s claim, the DRC decided that the Claimant was entitled to receive training
compensation for the training and education of the player for the period of time as
from 9 March 2010 until 24 January 2011, during the seasons of the player’s 20th and 21st
birthday, i.e. for 11 months, in the amount of EUR 26,175.
21.
Moreover, taking into consideration the Claimant’s claim as well as art. 3 par. 2 of
Annexe 4 of the Regulations, the members of the Chamber decided that the
Respondent has to pay interest of 5% p.a. over the amount payable as training
compensation as of 4 March 2011 until the date of effective payment.
22.
With regard to the Claimant’s claim for the reimbursement of legal expenses, the
Chamber recalled the contents of art. 18 par. 4 of the Procedural Rules, which clearly
stipulates that no procedural compensation shall be awarded in proceedings in front of
the Dispute Resolution Chamber. Therefore, the members of the Chamber had no other
alternative than to reject this part of the claim.
23.
In continuation, the DRC referred to art. 18 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules, according to
which in the proceedings before the Dispute Resolution Chamber relating to disputes
regarding training compensation costs in the maximum amount of currency of country
H 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 and that, 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.
24.
In respect of the above, the DRC held that the amount in dispute to be taken into
consideration in the present proceedings amounts to EUR 26,175 related to the claim of
the Claimant. Therefore, 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).
25.
Considering that the case at hand did not show particular factual difficulty but, on the
other hand a certain legal complexity, the Chamber determined the final amount of
costs of the current proceedings to the amount of currency of country H 3,000.
Training Compensation for the player L
(Club A, from country B / Club F, from country S)
6
26.
In view of all of the above, the Chamber concluded that the amount of currency of
country H 3,000 has to be paid by the Respondent to cover the costs of the present
proceedings in front of FIFA.
27.
In conclusion, the DRC decided that the claim of the Claimant is partially accepted and
that the Respondent is liable to pay the amount of EUR 26,175 plus 5% interest p.a. as
of 4 March 2011 until the date of effective payment to the Claimant for the training
and education of the player as well as the amount of currency of country H 3,000 as
procedural costs.
28.
Finally, the Chamber concluded its deliberation by deciding that any further claim of
the Claimant is rejected.
III.
Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Club A, is partially accepted.
2.
The Respondent, Club F, has to pay to the Claimant, Club A, the amount of EUR 26,175
plus 5% interest p.a. as from 4 March 2011 until the date of effective payment, within
30 days as from the date of notification of the present decision.
3.
If the aforementioned sum plus interest is not paid within the aforementioned
deadline, 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 proceeding in the amount of currency of country H
3,000 is to be paid by the Respondent, Club F, to FIFA within 30 days of notification of
the present decision to the following bank account with reference to case no. XX-XXXX:
5.
Any further claims lodged by the Claimant, Club A, are rejected.
Training Compensation for the player L
(Club A, from country B / Club F, from country S)
7
6.
The Claimant, Club A, is directed to inform the Respondent, Club F, immediately and
directly of the account number to which the remittance 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: [email protected]
www.tas-cas.org
For the Dispute Resolution Chamber
______________________
Jérôme Valcke
Secretary General
Encl. CAS directives
Training Compensation for the player L
(Club A, from country B / Club F, from country S)
8