Training Compensation
Texto da decisão
Decis ion of the
S ingle Judge of the s ub-com m ittee of the Dis pute
Res olution Cham ber (DRC)
passed on 13 July 2018,
by Eirik Monsen (Norway),
Single Judge of the sub-committee of the DRC,
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 cas e
1.
According to an official confirmation issued by the Football Federation of Country B,
the player, Player E (hereinafter: the player), born on 17 November 1995, was
registered with its affiliated club, Club A (hereinafter: the Claimant), as from 13 May
2010 and “since (…) no other association has ever requested an international
clearance and/or notified the [Football Federation of Country B] of any transfer, thus
from a technical point of view the player is still deemed to be registered with (…) [the
Claimant]”.
2.
Equally, according to the player passport issued by the Football Federation of Country
D, the player was registered with its affiliated clubs as follows:
3.
Club
Registration dates
Status
Club F
as from 28 March 2012 until 30 June 2012
Amateur
Club F
as from 4 October 2012 until 30 June 2013
Amateur
Club F
as from 1 July 2013 until 24 October 2013
Amateur
Club G
as from 25 October 2013 until 30 June 2014
Amateur
Club H
as from 26 September 2014 until 30 June 2015
Amateur
Likewise, according to the player passport issued by the Football Federation of
Country X, the player was registered with its affiliated clubs as follows:
Club
Registration dates
Status
Club U
as from 19 November 2015 until 1 December 2015
Amateur
Club V
as from 5 January 2016 until 30 June 2016
Amateur
Club W
as from 31 August 2016 until 22 January 2017
Amateur
4.
The football season in Country B runs from 9 June to 8 June of the following year.
5.
The Football Federation of Country B confirmed that the Claimant belonged to the
category 4 at the time the player was registered with it.
6.
According to the information contained in the Transfer Matching System (TMS), the
player was engaged out of contract free of payment by the Club from Country D,
Club C (hereinafter: the Respondent), with which he was registered as a professional
on 27 February 2017.
7.
Also according to TMS, the Respondent belonged to the category 3 at the time the
player was registered with it.
Training compensation for the Player E
(Club A, Country B / Club C, Country D)
2
8.
On 31 July 2017 and completed on 1 March 2018, the Claimant lodged a claim against
the Respondent before FIFA asking to be awarded training compensation for the first
professional registration of the player with the Respondent. In particular, the
Claimant requested EUR 37,479, plus “costs and interests”.
9.
In this context, the Claimant stated that the player played for it as from 13 May 2010
until the end of the season 2012 and that he was registered with it until his
registration with the Respondent since, following the departure of the player from
the Claimant, no request for an international clearance or request for registration
with any other club has been made.
10.
In addition, the Claimant argued that the player’s registration with the Respondent
is his first registration as a professional and that, as a result, it is entitled to training
compensation, which shall be calculated on the basis of the average training costs of
the two clubs involved.
11.
In spite of having been invited to do so, the Respondent did not reply to the
Claimant’s claim.
II.
Cons iderations of the S ingle Judge of the s ub-com m ittee of the DRC
1.
First of all, the Single Judge of the sub-committee of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
(hereinafter also referred to Single 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 31 July 2017. Consequently, the 2017 edition of the Rules
Governing the Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute
Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: Procedural Rules) is applicable to the matter at
hand (cf. art. 21 of the Procedural Rules).
2.
Subsequently, the Single Judge 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 2018). 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 Single Judge is
competent to decide on the present dispute relating to training compensation
between clubs belonging to different associations handled through TMS.
3.
Furthermore, and taking into consideration that the player was registered with the
Respondent on 27 February 2017, the Single Judge analysed which regulations should
be applicable as to the substance of the matter. In this respect, he confirmed that in
accordance with art. 26 par. 1 and 2 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of
Players (edition 2018), the 2016 edition of the said regulations (hereinafter:
Regulations) is applicable to the matter at hand as to the substance.
4.
The competence of the Single Judge and the applicable regulations having been
established, the Single Judge entered into the substance of the matter. The Single
Training compensation for the Player E
(Club A, Country B / Club C, Country D)
3
Judge started by acknowledging the above-mentioned facts of the case as well as the
documentation on file. However, the Single Judge 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. In particular,
the Single Judge 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 Transfer Matching System (TMS).
5.
First of all, the Single Judge took note that the Claimant maintained that it is entitled
to receive training compensation from the Respondent in the amount of EUR 37,479,
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 Single Judge duly noted that the Respondent never took position
in the present matter, although having been invited to do so by FIFA. Therefore, the
Single 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 Single 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 Single Judge referred to the rules applicable to
training compensation and stated that, as established in art. 20 of the Regulations in
conjunction with art. 2 par. 1 of Annexe 4 of the Regulations, training compensation
is payable, as a general rule, when, before the end of the season of the player’s 23rd
birthday, a player is registered for the first time as a professional or when a
professional is transferred between clubs of two different associations. 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.
On the basis of the documentation available to him, the Single Judge established that
the player was registered with the Respondent for the first time as a professional
before the end of the season of the player’s 23rd birthday.
10.
The aforementioned having been established, the Single Judge 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 Single 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 Single Judge
concluded that art. 6 par. 3 of Annexe 4 of the Regulations applies in the case at hand
as lex specialis.
Training compensation for the Player E
(Club A, Country B / Club C, Country D)
4
11.
However, in this regard, the Single 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
W, cf. point I./3. 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).
12.
On account of the above considerations, the Single Judge decided that the
Respondent is liable to pay training compensation to the Claimant.
13.
Turning his attention to the calculation of the amount of training compensation due
to the Claimant, the Single Judge recalled that the player was born on 17 November
1995 and was registered with the Claimant as from 13 May 2010 until 27 March 2012.
14.
Therefore, in accordance with art. 20 in combination with Annexe 4 of the
Regulations, the Single Judge considered that the Claimant is, thus, entitled to receive
training compensation from the Respondent for the period as from 13 May 2010 until
27 March 2012.
15.
Furthermore, the Single Judge referred to the FIFA circular no. 1537 dated 3 May 2016
which provides details for the calculation of training compensation as well as to art.
5 par. 1 and par. 2 of Annexe 4 of the Regulations, which stipulate that as a general
rule, to calculate the training compensation due to a player’s former club, it is
necessary to take the costs that would have been incurred by the new club if it had
trained the player itself. Moreover, the Single Judge referred to art. 6 of Annexe 4 of
the Regulations which contains special provisions in case a player moves from a lower
to a higher category club or from a higher to a lower category club within the
territory of the EU/EEA. In this respect, the Single Judge recalled that the Claimant
belonged to club category 4 (indicative amount of EUR 10,000 per year within UEFA)
and that the Respondent belonged to the club category 3 (indicative amount of EUR
30,000 per year within UEFA).
16.
Consequently, the Single Judge concluded that, pursuant to art. 6 par. 1 lit a) of
Annexe 4 of the Regulations, the calculation of the amount of training compensation
shall be based on the average training costs of the two clubs.
17.
In view of all of the above, the Single Judge decided that the Respondent is liable to
pay the amount of EUR 27,499 to the Claimant as training compensation in relation
to the registration of the player with the Respondent.
18.
Moreover, taking into consideration the Claimant’s claim for interest, which was not
further specified, the Single Judge decided that 5% interest p.a. shall apply as of the
date of receipt of the claim, i.e. 31 July 2017, until the date of effective payment.
19.
The Single Judge concluded his considerations on this matter by deciding that any
further claim of the Claimant is rejected.
Training compensation for the Player E
(Club A, Country B / Club C, Country D)
5
20.
Lastly, the Single 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.
21.
In respect of the above, the Single Judge held that the amount to be taken into
consideration in the present proceedings is EUR 37,479 related to the claim of the
Claimant. Consequently, the Single Judge concluded that the maximum amount of
costs of the proceedings corresponds to CHF 5,000 (cf. table in Annex A).
22.
As a result, the Chamber determined the costs of the current proceedings to the
amount of CHF 5,000, which, considering the degree of success, shall be split between
the parties.
III.
Decis ion of the S ingle Judge of the s ub-com m ittee of the DRC
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Club A, is partially accepted.
2.
The Respondent, Club C, has to pay to the Claimant, w ithin 30 day s as from the date
of notification of this decision, the amount of EUR 27,499, plus 5% interest p.a. as of
31 July 2017 until the date of effective payment.
3.
In the event that the aforementioned sum plus interest is not paid by the Respondent
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 is rejected.
5.
The final costs of the proceedings in the amount of CHF 5,000 are to be paid, w ithin
30 day s of notification of the present decision, to FIFA to the following bank account
with reference to case no. TMS XXXXXXX:
UBS Zurich
Account number 366.677.01U (FIFA Players’ Status)
Clearing number 230
IBAN: CH 27 0023 0230 3666 7701U
SWIFT: UBSWCHZH80A
as follows:
5.1. The amount of CHF 4,000 by the Respondent;
5.2. The amount of CHF 1,000 by the Claimant.
Training compensation for the Player E
(Club A, Country B / Club C, Country D)
6
6.
The Claimant is directed to inform the Respondent immediately and directly of the
account number to which the remittance under point 2. above is to be made and to
notify the Single Judge of the sub-committee of the DRC of every payment received.
****
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
Switzerland
Tel: +41 21 613 50 00
Fax: +41 21 613 50 01
e-mail: [email protected]
www.tas-cas.org
For the Single Judge of the
sub-committee of the DRC:
Omar Ongaro
Football Regulatory Director
Encl.: CAS directives
Training compensation for the Player E
(Club A, Country B / Club C, Country D)
7