Training Compensation
Texto da decisão
Decis ion of the s ub-com m ittee of the
Dis pute Res olution Cham ber (DRC)
passed on 15 June 2017,
in the following composition:
Thom as Grim m (Country R), Deputy Chairman
Guillerm o S . Guale (Ecuador), member
Johan v an Gaalen (S outh Africa), member
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 Player E
I.
Facts of the cas e
1.
According to the player passport issued by the Football Association of Country B
(Football Association F) the player, Player E, born on 2 July 1993, was registered with its
affiliated club, Club A (hereinafter: the Claimant), as from 1 September 2004 until 27
August 2008 as an amateur.
2.
Equally, according to the player passport issued by the Football Association of Country G
(Football Association H), the player was registered with the following Clubs of Country
G as an amateur:
Club
Registration dates
Club J
from 27 August 2008 until 12 August 2009
Club K
from 13 August 2009 until 23 June 2011
3.
The football season in Country B runs from 1 July to 30 June of the following year.
4.
According to the information contained in the Transfer Matching System (TMS), the
Club of Country D, Club L, and the player concluded an employment contract for the
period between 29 March 2013 and 30 June 2014. As a result, on 29 March 2013, Club L
entered a transfer instruction to permanently engage the player from Club K.
5.
On 15 April 2013, Club L cancelled the transfer instruction it introduced in the TMS on
the basis that it was wrongly requesting the International Transfer Certificate (ITC) from
Country G instead of from Country B.
6.
Also according to the TMS, the Club of Country M, Club N, and the player entered into
an employment contract dated 1 July 2013 for the period between 1 July 2013 and 30
June 2016. Consequently, on 21 August 2013, Club N entered a transfer instruction to
permanently engage the player from the Club of Country B, Club O. On 30 August 2013,
the Football Association F issued the ITC of the player, according to which his last club
was Club O, in favour of the Football Association of Country M (Football Association P),
which had not confirmed the receipt of the ITC. On 9 January 2017, the Football
Association F cancelled the transfer in the TMS.
7.
According to the player passport issued by the Football Federation of Country D
(Football Federation Q), the player was registered with the Club of Country D, Club C
(hereinafter: the Respondent), as from 28 February 2014 until 30 June 2014 as an
amateur, and on 1 October 2014 as a professional. In this respect, the Football
Federation Q confirmed that on 13 January 2014 and on 20 February 2014 it requested
the ITC of the player from the Football Association P and that it never received a reply.
Training compensation for the player, Player E
(Club A, Country B / Club C, Country D)
2
Consequently, on 28 February 2014, the Football Federation Q provisionally registered
the player.
8.
Also according to the player passport issued by the Football Federation Q, the
Respondent belonged to the category 3 at the time the player was professionally
registered with it.
9.
On 30 March 2016, the Claimant lodged a claim against the Respondent in front of FIFA
asking to be awarded training compensation from the Respondent in connection with
the first professional registration of the player. In particular, the Claimant requested
EUR 42,916.67, plus 5% interest p.a. as of the 31st day after the registration of the player
with the Respondent, “presumably as of 1 November 2014”.
10.
In reply to FIFA’s request to the Claimant to provide a full footballing career history of
the player, the Claimant provided a copy of a declaration of the player, according to
which after leaving Club K and until he joined the Respondent, he has “not been
registered in any football club. After my time in [Club K] I went on several trials for
example in Country M and Country R, but I never found another club and I did not sign
any new contract, until joining [Club C] in February 2014”. Equally, the Claimant
provided a copy of a confirmation of the Football Association P and the Football
Association of Country R, according to which the player was never registered in Country
M or in Country R.
11.
The Respondent has not replied to the claim of the Claimant within the time limit given
by FIFA to do so.
II.
Cons iderations of the s ub-com m ittee of the DRC
1.
First of all, the sub-committee of the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter also
referred to as sub-committee) 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
30 March 2016. Consequently, the Rules Governing the Procedures of the Players’ Status
Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber, edition 2015 (hereinafter: Procedural
Rules) are applicable to the matter at hand (cf. art. 21 of the Procedural Rules).
2.
Subsequently, the sub-committee referred to art. 3 of the Procedural Rules, which states
that the Dispute Resolution Chamber shall examine its jurisdiction in light of arts 22 to
24 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2016). In accordance
with art. 3 of Annexe 6 in conjunction with art. 24 par. 3 and art. 22 lit. d) of the
Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players, the sub-committee is competent to
decide on the present dispute relating to training compensation between clubs
belonging to different associations handled through TMS.
Training compensation for the player, Player E
(Club A, Country B / Club C, Country D)
3
3.
Furthermore, the sub-committee analysed which regulations 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 2016), and
considering that the player was registered as a professional with the Respondent on 1
October 2014, the 2014 edition of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players
(hereinafter: Regulations) is applicable to the matter at hand as to the substance.
4.
The competence of the sub-committee and the applicable regulations having been
established, the sub-committee entered into the substance of the matter. The subcommittee started by acknowledging the above-mentioned facts of the case as well as
the documentation on file. However, the sub-committee emphasized that in the
following considerations it will refer only to the facts, arguments and documentary
evidence which it considered pertinent for the assessment of the matter at hand. In
particular, the sub-committee recalled that in accordance with art. 6 par. 3 of Annexe 3
of the Regulations, FIFA may use, within the scope of proceedings pertaining to the
application of the Regulations, any documentation or evidence generated or contained
in the TMS.
5.
First of all, the sub-committee recalled that the player was born on 2 July 1993 and was
registered with the Claimant as from 1 September 2004 until 27 August 2008 as an
amateur. Thereafter the player was registered as an amateur in Country G until 23 June
2011.
6.
In continuation, the sub-committee took note that the Claimant maintained that it is
entitled to receive training compensation from the Respondent in the amount of EUR
42,916.67, on the basis that the player was allegedly registered for the first time as a
professional with the Respondent.
7.
Furthermore, the sub-committee observed that the Respondent, in spite of having been
invited to do so, had, for its part, not presented its response to the claim of the
Claimant within the relevant time limit set by FIFA. As a result, bearing in mind the
constant jurisprudence of the Dispute Resolution Chamber in this regard and in
application of art. 9 par. 3 of the Procedural Rules, the sub-committee decided not to
take into account the reply of the Respondent and established that, in accordance with
the aforementioned provision, it shall take a decision on the basis of those documents
on file that were provided prior to the deadline set by FIFA, in casu, on the statements
and documents presented by the Claimant.
8.
In this context, the sub-committee was eager to emphasize that the player passport
issued by the Football Association F indicated that the player was registered with the
Claimant as an amateur for the entire period of time during which the player was
registered with the Claimant. Equally, the sub-committee noted that, according to the
player passport issued by the Football Association H, the player was also registered with
Club J and Club K as an amateur.
Training compensation for the player, Player E
(Club A, Country B / Club C, Country D)
4
9.
Turning its attention to the claim of the Claimant and the allegations contained therein,
the sub-committee stressed that in accordance with the legal principle of the burden of
proof as contained in art. 12 par. 3 of the Procedural Rules, any party claiming a right
on the basis of an alleged fact shall carry the burden of proof. In view of the foregoing
and considering the claim of the Claimant, the sub-committee underscored that it was
for the Claimant to prove that the player had not previously been registered as a
professional with any other club before being registered as a professional with the
Respondent.
10.
In this respect, the sub-committee took note that on the one hand, apart from the
aforementioned player passports issued by the Football Association F, Football
Association H and Football Federation Q, the Claimant provided a confirmation issued
by the player, according to which after leaving Club K, he had not been registered with
any other club and, on the other hand, that according to the information contained in
the TMS, the player, before joining the Respondent, had been registered in Country B
(cf. number I./6. above).
11.
On account of the above, the sub-committee established that the Claimant failed to
provide an accurate and complete footballing career history of the player, in spite of
having been invited to do so.
12.
Therefore, the sub-committee decided that it could not be established that the player
was registered for the first time as a professional with the Respondent.
13.
Consequently, and in view of all of the above considerations, the sub-committee
decided that the claim of the Claimant must be rejected.
14.
Lastly, the sub-committee 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.
15.
In respect of the above, the sub-committee held that the amount to be taken into
consideration in the present proceedings is EUR 42,916.67 related to the claim of the
Claimant. Consequently, the sub-committee concluded that the maximum amount of
costs of the proceedings corresponds to CHF 5,000 (cf. table in Annex A).
16.
As a result, and taking into account that the claim of the Claimant has been rejected as
well as that the case at hand did not compose any complex factual or legal issues, the
sub-committee determined the costs of the current proceedings to the amount of CHF
3,000, which shall be borne by the Claimant.
Training compensation for the player, Player E
(Club A, Country B / Club C, Country D)
5
III.
Decision of the s ub-com m ittee of the DRC
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Club A, is rejected.
2.
The final costs of the proceedings in the amount of CHF 3,000 are to be paid by the
Claimant, w ithin 30 day s as from the date of notification of the present decision, to
FIFA to the following bank account with reference to case no. XXX:
UBS Zurich
Account number 366.677.01U (FIFA Players’ Status)
Clearing number 230
IBAN: CH 27 0023 0230 3666 7701U
SWIFT: UBSWCHZH80A
*****
Note relating to the m otiv ated decis ion (legal remedy):
According to art. 58 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
Country R
Tel: +41 21 613 50 00
Fax: +41 21 613 50 01
e-mail: [email protected]
www.tas-cas.org
For the sub-committee of the DRC:
Omar Ongaro
Training compensation for the player, Player E
(Club A, Country B / Club C, Country D)
6
Football Regulatory Director
Enclosed: CAS directives
2/2
4/4
Training compensation for the player, Player E
(Club A, Country B / Club C, Country D)
7