Solidarity Contribution
Texto da decisão
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) judge
passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 10 July 2013,
by Mr Philippe Diallo (France), DRC judge,
on the claim presented by the club,
Club E, from country B
as Claimant
against the club
Club A, from country E
as Respondent
regarding solidarity contribution in connection with the transfer of the player
F
I.
Facts of the case
1.
According to the player passport issued by the country B Football Federation, the player,
F (hereinafter: the player), born in October 1982, was registered with its affiliated Club
E (hereinafter: the Claimant) as from 1 February 2002 until 30 June 2002.
2.
The relevant sporting season in country B during the period of registration of the player
with the Claimant started in January and ended in December.
3.
According to the information contained in the Transfer Matching System (TMS), the
Club N, from country P (hereinafter: Club N) and the Club E, from country B
(hereinafter: the Respondent) agreed upon a transfer compensation for the player
amounting to EUR 650,000 payable on 1 August 2011.
4.
The country E Football Association confirmed that the player was registered with the
Respondent on 4 August 2011.
5.
The Claimant contacted FIFA on 19 October 2011, claiming the payment of its
proportion of solidarity contribution in connection with the transfer of the player from
Club N to the Respondent. In particular, the Claimant requested the payment of EUR
1,500, i.e. 0.2054% of the total transfer amount based on a transfer compensation of
EUR 730,000, as well as 5% interest p.a. “from the registration date”.
6.
On 25 January 2012, the Respondent rejected the claim lodged against it, arguing that
the Claimant was not entitled to receive any payment of solidarity contribution
considering that, at the time of the player’s relevant transfer, the latter was around 30
years old and had been already transferred to “more than 5 clubs as professional”
before being transferred to the Respondent. Therefore, according to the Respondent,
the player became professional at the age of 17, consequently “solidarity contribution is
supposed to be taken from the first two clubs the player was transferred”.
Distribution of the Solidarity contribution in connection with the transfer of the player F
(Club E, from country B / Club A, from country E)
2
II.
Considerations of the DRC judge
1.
First of all, the 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 19
October 2011. Consequently, the Rules Governing the Procedures of the Players’ Status
Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber (edition 2008; hereinafter: the
Procedural Rules) are applicable to the matter at hand (cf. art. 21 par. 1 and par. 2 of
the Procedural Rules).
2.
Subsequently, the DRC judge referred to art. 3 par. 2 and 3 of the Procedural Rules and
confirmed that in accordance with art. 24 par. 1 and 2 iii) in conjunction with art. 22 lit.
d) of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2012), he is
competent to decide on the present matter, which concerns a dispute relating to the
solidarity mechanism 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, he referred, on the one hand, to art. 26 par. 1 and 2 of the Regulations on the
Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2010 and 2012) and, on the other hand, to the
fact that the present claim was lodged on 19 October 2011 and that the player was
registered with the Respondent on 4 August 2011. In view of the aforementioned, the
DRC judge concluded that 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 DRC judge and the applicable regulations having been
established, the DRC judge entered into the substance of the matter. In doing so, the
DRC judge started by acknowledging the above-mentioned facts of the case as well as
the documents contained in the file.
5.
In this respect, the DRC judge noted that the Claimant had requested the payment of
0.2054% of the total transfer compensation as solidarity contribution from the
Respondent.
6.
In addition, the DRC judge took into account that according to the information
contained in the TMS, Club N and the Respondent had agreed upon a transfer
compensation amounting to EUR 650,0 00, payable on 1 August 2011.
7.
Furthermore, the DRC judge noted that the Respondent had contested the Claimant’s
entitlement to receive any payment as solidarity contribution in connection with the
transfer of the player arguing that at the time of the relevant transfer, the latter was
around 30 years old and had been already transferred to several clubs as a professional
before being transferred to the Respondent.
Distribution of the Solidarity contribution in connection with the transfer of the player F
(Club E, from country B / Club A, from country E)
3
8.
Considering the above, the DRC judge referred to art. 21 in combination with art. 1 of
Annexe 5 of the Regulations which stipulate 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 to the club(s) involved in the
training and education of the player between the seasons of his 12th and 23rd birthday.
9.
In view of the aforementioned, the DRC judge emphasized that irrespective of the age
of a player as well as of his professional status with third club(s) before being registered
with a particular club, solidarity contribution is due to the club(s) that were involved in
his training and education between the seasons of his 12th and 23rd birthday. As a result,
the DRC judge held that the relevant argumentation of the Respondent had to be
rejected.
10.
In continuation, the DRC judge recalled that, as confirmed by the country B Football
Federation, the player, born in October 1982, had been registered with the Claimant as
from 1 February 2002 until 30 June 2002.
11.
On account of the above and in accordance with art. 1 of Annexe 5 of the Regulations,
the DRC judge considered that the Claimant is, thus, entitled to receive solidarity
contribution for the period as from 1 February 2002 until 30 June 2002, i.e. for 5 months
of the season of the player’s 20th birthday.
12.
In light of all of the above, as well as taking into account the percentage claimed by the
Claimant, the DRC judge decided that the Respondent is liable to pay the amount of
EUR 1,335 to the Claimant as solidarity contribution in relation to the transfer of the
player from Club N to the Respondent. In addition and as to the Claimant’s request
related to the payment of interest on the claimed amount, the DRC judge referred to
art. 2 par. 1 of Annexe 5 of the Regulations as well as to the longstanding practice of
the DRC and decided that the Respondent has to pay interest at a rate of 5% p.a. as
from 1 September 2011 until the date of effective payment.
13.
As a result of all the above, the Single judge concluded that the claim of the Claimant is
partially accepted and the Respondent has to pay to the Claimant EUR 1,335 as
solidarity contribution, plus 5% p.a. as from 1 September 2011 until the date of
effective payment.
14.
Lastly, the DRC judge referred to 25 par. 2 of the Regulations in combination with art.
18 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules, according to which in the proceedings before the
Dispute Resolution Chamber, including the DRC judge, regarding training compensation
and the solidarity mechanism, 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 (cf. art. 18 par. 1 of
the Procedural Rules).
Distribution of the Solidarity contribution in connection with the transfer of the player F
(Club E, from country B / Club A, from country E)
4
15.
In respect of the above, taking into account that the claim of the Claimant is partially
accepted and that the Respondent is the party at fault, the DRC judge concluded that
the Respondent has to bear the costs of the current proceedings in front of FIFA.
16.
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.
17.
On that basis, the DRC judge held that the amount to be taken into consideration in the
present proceedings is less than currency of country H 5,000. Consequently, the DRC
judge concluded that the maximum amount of costs of the proceedings corresponds to
currency of country H 5,000.
18.
Considering that the case at hand did not compose any complex factual or legal issues
as well as taking into account the particularities of the present matter, the DRC judge
determined the costs of the current proceedings to the amount of currency of country H
500.
19.
Consequently, the DRC judge concluded that the amount of currency of country H 500
has to be paid by the Respondent to cover the costs of the present proceedings.
*****
III.
Decision of the DRC judge
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Club E, is partially accepted.
2.
The Respondent, Club A, has to pay to the Claimant, Club E, within 30 days as from
the date of notification of this decision, the amount of EUR 1,335 as well as 5% interest
p.a. on said amount as of 1 September 2011 until the date of effective payment.
3.
If the aforementioned amount 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.
Any further claim lodged by the Claimant, Club E, is rejected.
5.
The Claimant, Club E, is directed to inform the Respondent, Club A, 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.
Distribution of the Solidarity contribution in connection with the transfer of the player F
(Club E, from country B / Club A, from country E)
5
6.
The final costs of the proceedings in the amount of currency of country H 500 are to be
paid by the Respondent, Club A, within 30 days as from the date of notification of the
present decision, to FIFA to the following bank account with reference to case no. :
*****
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 DRC judge:
__________________________________
Markus Kattner
Deputy Secretary General
Encl.: CAS directives
Distribution of the Solidarity contribution in connection with the transfer of the player F
(Club E, from country B / Club A, from country E)
6