Training Compensation
Texto da decisão
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 9 May 2014,
in the following composition:
Geoff Thompson (England), Chairman
Johan van Gaalen (South Africa), member
Damir Vrbanovic (Croatia), member
on the claim presented by
Football Federation, of country P
as Claimant
against the club,
Club X, of country H
as Respondent
regarding training compensation in connection
with the player A
I.
Facts of the case
1.
The Football Federation of country P (hereinafter: FF or the Claimant) confirmed that the
player A (hereinafter: the player), born on 30 November 1989, was registered in country P,
as an amateur, with the following clubs:
- Club N as of 6 June 2003 until 9 June 2005;
- Club C as of 10 June 2008 until 29 August 2008.
2.
The Football Federation of country P confirmed that the football seasons in country P run
as from 1 January to 31 December.
3.
The Football Federation of country H confirmed that the player was registered with the Hu
Club D, from country H (hereinafter: the Respondent), as a professional, on 17 September
2008.
4.
The Football Federation of country H confirmed that the Respondent belonged to the
category II (indicative amount of EUR 60,000 per year) at the time the player was
registered with it.
5.
On 30 August 2010, the Claimant contacted FIFA asking for its proportion of training
compensation from the Respondent. In particular, the Football Federation of country P
requested the amount of EUR 41,997.42 for the period between 6 June 2003 and 9 June
2005.
6.
On 26 April 2011, the Respondent rejected the Claimant’s claim by stating that it requested
the Football Federation of country P to inform about the registration career of the player
before transferring him. In this respect, the Respondent assessed that the Football
Federation of country P replied in writing that the player had never been registered with
any country P club, submitting a copy of the letter dated 5 August 2008 issued by the
Football Federation of country P.
7.
Moreover, the Respondent held that, upon request to the Football Federation of country P
of the transfer of the player to the Respondent, the Football Federation of country P issued
a new letter, dated 29 August 2008, rectifying that the player was actually registered with
Club C (hereinafter: Club C).
8.
In addition, the Respondent held that, in order to avoid paying any training compensation
for the player, it requested an authorisation from Club C, which copy, dated 19 August
2008, was submitted. Furthermore, and in this respect, on 10 November 2008, Club C and
the Respondent entered into an agreement which reads as follows:
“1. Parties agree that […], Player A (place and date of birth: , 30.11.201989, passport:
XXXX) […] are contracted players of [the Respondent].
2. Club C declares that it will not claim for training or solidarity compensation or
compensation of any other form now or in the future from [the Respondent] and that no
other previous clubs of the players will have a claim for training or solidarity
compensation or compensation of any other form from [the Respondent] now or in the
future”.
9.
In spite of having been invited by FIFA to do so, the Claimant did not provide its response
to the Respondent’s reply, although it was informed that, in absence of a reply, the
Training compensation in connection with the player A
(Football Federation, of country P/ Club X, from country H)
2
Dispute Resolution Chamber would take a decision on the basis of the information and
evidence at disposal.
II.
Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
First of all, the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: the DRC or the Chamber)
analysed whether it was competent to deal with the matter at stake. In this respect, it
referred to art. 21 par. 2 and 3 of the Rules Governing the Procedures of the Players’ Status
Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber (editions 2008 and 2012). The present
matter was submitted to FIFA on 30 August 2010. As a consequence, the Chamber
concluded that 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.
2.
With regard to the competence of the Chamber, art. 3 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules states
that the Dispute Resolution Chamber shall examine its jurisdiction in the light of the
articles 22 to 24 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2012). In
accordance with art. 1 par. 1 of the aforementioned Regulations, which describes the
scope of the relevant Regulations, in connection with articles 24 par. 1 and 22 d) of said
Regulations, the Dispute Resolution Chamber is competent to decide on the present
litigation with an international dimension concerning the training compensation claimed
by the Claimant for the training and education of the player, A in connection with the first
registration of said player as a professional for the Respondent.
3.
Furthermore, and taking into consideration that the player was registered for the
Respondent on 17 September 2008, 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 (edition 2012, 2010, 2009 and 2008),
the edition (2008) of the Regulations for 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 started by acknowledging the
facts of the case, as well as the documentation contained in the file.
5.
First and foremost, the Chamber stated that, as established in art. 20 of the Regulations in
combination with art. 1 par. 1, as well as art. 2 of Annex 4 to the Regulations, training
compensation is payable, as a general rule, for training incurred between the ages of 12
and 21 when the player concerned is registered for the first time as a professional, or
when a professional is transferred between two clubs of two different associations, before
the end of the season of the player’s 23rd birthday.
Training compensation in connection with the player A
(Football Federation, of country P/ Club X, from country H)
3
6.
The Chamber underlined that in the present case, it was an association and not a club
which claimed payment of the training compensation. Therefore, it first had to analyse
whether the conditions set forth in art. 3 par. 3 of Annexe 4 of the Regulations were
fulfilled.
7.
The Chamber recapitulated that the aforementioned provision stipulates that if a link
between a professional player and any of the clubs that trained him cannot be established
within 18 months of his transfer, or if those clubs do not make themselves known within
18 months of the player’s first registration as a professional, the training compensation
shall be paid to the association(s) of the country where the professional player was
trained.
8.
On this basis, the members of the Chamber pointed out that, at first, it had to analyse
whether the time frame of 18 months for the possible establishment of a link between a
professional player and a club had already elapsed after the transfer of the player to the
Respondent, which is a prerequisite contained in art. 3 par. 3 of Annexe 4 of the
Regulations.
9.
To that regard, the DRC stated that the transfer of the player from the involved club to the
Respondent had taken place on 17 September 2008 and referred to art. 3 par. 2 of Annexe
4 of the Regulations, which stipulates that the training compensation should be paid by
the new club no later than 30 days after the player’s registration. On the other hand, the
DRC took note that the claim was lodged on 30 August 2010.
10.
In addition, the DRC outlined that art. 3 par. 3 of Annexe 4 of the Regulations mentions
that the training compensation shall be paid to the association of the country where the
professional was trained. Thus, another requirement in order for an association to be
entitled to the relevant proportion of the training compensation is that such association
can prove that the player was in fact trained.
11.
In continuation, the Chamber took note of the fact that, in support of its claim, the
Claimant submitted the player passport, which evidenced that the player was registered
with , Club N from country P, as of 6 June 2003 until 9 June 2005.
12.
In view of the aforementioned, the Chamber took note that the required time frame of 18
months for the possible establishment of a link between the player and a training club had
elapsed as well as that the player was indeed trained in country P during the period
between 6 June 2003 and 9 June 2005. Therefore, the Claimant was, in principle, entitled
to claim training compensation.
13.
In continuation, the DRC acknowledged that the player, born on 30 November 1989, was,
according to the Football Federation of country P, registered with its affiliated clubs, as an
amateur, Club N from 6 June 2003 until 9 June 2005 as well as Club C from 10 June 2008
until 29 August 2008.
Training compensation in connection with the player A
(Football Federation, of country P/ Club X, from country H)
4
14.
Furthermore, the Chamber duly noted that, on the one hand, the Claimant is requesting
training compensation from the Respondent in the amount of EUR 41,997.42 for the
period the player was allegedly registered with Club N, and, on the other hand, that the
Respondent contested the Claimant’s entitlement to receive any training compensation,
arguing that, on the occasion of the transfer of the player, the Football Federation of
country P had confirmed that the player was only registered for Club C before the
Respondent registered the player.
15.
In this respect, the Chamber referred to art. 3 par. 1 of Annex 4 to the Regulations,
according to which the club, for which the player was registered for the first time as a
professional, is responsible for paying training compensation in accordance with the
players’ career history as provided for in the player passport.
16.
In continuation, the DRC also reminded of art. 5 par. 1 of the Regulations, which stipulates
that professional, as well as amateur players, must be registered with an association to
play for a club. In particular, the Chamber noted that said article clearly points out that it is
the responsibility of an association to register the player. In the same line, the Chamber
underlined that according to art. 7 of the Regulations, an association has to provide its
affiliated club registering a player with a player passport indicating the complete player’s
football career as from the season of his 12th birthday.
17.
Furthermore, the Chamber took into account that the Respondent had asked the
Claimant’s association for the registration career of the player before transferring him.
18.
Taking into account the above, the DRC deemed important to underline that the
Respondent absolutely complied with art. 3 par. 1 of Annex 4 of the Regulations by asking
the responsible entity, i.e. the Football Federation of country P, in order to know the
player’s career history.
19.
Reverting to the facts of the present case, the Chamber emphasised that on 29 August
2008, after having informed the Respondent that there were no records of the player, the
Football Federation of country P had sent a letter to the Respondent, confirming that “the
player is registered for Club C”. As a result, relying on this statement, the Respondent
registered the player as a professional on 17 September 2008.
20.
In addition, the DRC highlighted that, although being invited to provide its final
comments, the Claimant failed to do so.
21.
In view of the aforementioned, the DRC noted that the question if the Respondent could
rely on the Football Federation of country P’s confirmation is fundamental to decide on
the Claimant’s right to receive training compensation.
22.
To that regard, the Chamber pointed out again that the Respondent proceeded, as
foreseen in the Regulations, by turning to the national association in order to find out the
player’s history.
Training compensation in connection with the player A
(Football Federation, of country P/ Club X, from country H)
5
23.
On this basis, the DRC referred to its previous decisions in which it had underlined that a
club registering a player has to turn for information to the respective association.
24.
Taking into account the foregoing, the Chamber unanimously concluded that the
associations are the pertinent contact in order to receive correct information about the
career of a player. Therefore, it decided that the Respondent could rely on the Football
Federation of country P’s confirmation.
25.
In view of the aforementioned and also with regard to the legal certainty, the DRC
concluded that it was not acceptable for a club, which takes a player under contract based
on the confirmation of the previous association and trusting that it would not have to pay
training compensation, to be subsequently obliged to pay training compensation.
26.
Taking into account all of the above, the Dispute Resolution Chamber emphasised that
based on the documentation at the time when the player was registered at the Football
Federation of country H, the Respondent had no reason to pay training compensation.
Consequently, the Chamber unanimously decided that the Respondent could not be
obliged to do so later, based on changed documents issued by the same association.
27.
Therefore, the DRC decided to reject the Claimant’s claim.
28.
In continuation, the Chamber 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 CHF 25,000 are levied.
The costs are to be borne in consideration of the parties’ degree of success in the
proceedings.
29.
In this respect, the DRC reiterated that the claim of the Claimant is rejected. Therefore, the
Claimant has to bear the costs of the current proceedings in front of FIFA.
30.
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.
31.
The amount in dispute to be taken into consideration in the present proceedings amounts
to EUR 41,997.42 related to the claim of the Claimant. Therefore, the Chamber concluded
that the maximum amount of costs of the proceedings corresponds to CHF 10,000 (cf. table
in Annexe A).
32.
As a result, and taking into account the complexity of the case, the Chamber determined
the final amount of costs of the current proceedings to the amount of CHF 10,000.
*****
Training compensation in connection with the player A
(Football Federation, of country P/ Club X, from country H)
6
III.
Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Football Federation of country P, is rejected.
2.
The final costs of the proceedings in the amount of CHF 10,000 are to be paid by the
Claimant, within 30 days of notification of the present decision, to FIFA to the following
bank account with reference to case no.:
UBS Zurich
Account number 366.677.01U (FIFA Players’ Status)
Clearing number 230
IBAN: CH27 0023 0230 3666 7701U
SWIFT: UBSWCHZH80A
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:
Markus Kattner
Deputy Secretary General
Encl. CAS directives
Training compensation in connection with the player A
(Football Federation, of country P/ Club X, from country H)
7