Training Compensation
Texto da decisão
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) judge
passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 27 August 2014,
by Philippe Diallo (France), DRC judge,
on the claim presented by the club,
Club A, from country B
as Claimant
against the club,
Club C, from country D
as Respondent
regarding training compensation in connection
with the Player E
I.
Facts of the case
1.
The player from country B, Player E (hereinafter: the player) was born on 29
September 1989.
2.
The Football Federation from country B confirmed that the player was registered
with its affiliated club, Club A (hereinafter: Claimant or Club A) from 30 October
2009 until 28 July 2010 as an amateur.
3.
The sporting season in country B ran from 24 October 2009 until 28 July 2010 for
the 2009/2010 sporting season.
4.
According to the Football Federation from country D, the player was registered
with its affiliated club, Club C (hereinafter: Respondent or Club C) as a
professional on 16 January 2010.
5.
On 6 October 2011, Club A contacted FIFA claiming the payment of training
compensation from Club C on the grounds that the player, in January 2010, signed
his first professional contract.
6.
In this respect, Club A claims EUR 6,774.26 as training compensation plus “5%
interest to be counted from 15 February 2010”.
7.
In its response to the claim, Club C rejects its liability to pay “solidarity
contribution”. In this respect, Club C claims that the amount claimed, together
with the amount claimed by another club from country B in connection with the
player’s registration with it, is disproportional to the amount of salary paid to the
player and moreover, it is up to the new club to calculate the amount of
“solidarity contribution”.
*****
II.
Considerations of the DRC judge
1.
First, the Dispute Resolution Chamber (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 6 October 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. 1 and par. 2 of the Procedural
Rules).
Training compensation in relation to the Player E (Club A, from country B / Club C, from country D)
2/7
2.
Subsequently, the DRC judge referred to art. 3 par. 2 of the Procedural Rules and
confirmed that in accordance with art. 24 par. 1 and par. 2 lit. ii, in combination
with art. 22 lit. d) of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (2014
edition), the DRC judge is competent to deal with the matter at stake relating to
training compensation between clubs belonging to different associations.
3.
Furthermore, the DRC 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 (2014
edition), and considering that the claim was lodged on 6 October 2011 as well as
that the player was registered with the Respondent on 16 January 2010, the 2009
edition of said Regulations (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. The DRC
judge started by acknowledging the aforementioned facts of the case as well as
the documentation on file.
5.
First, the DRC judge recalled that the player, born on 29 September 1989, was
registered with the Claimant as from 30 October 2009 until 28 July 2010 as an
amateur as well as that the player was registered as a professional with the
Respondent on 16 January 2010.
6.
Moreover, the DRC judge took note that the Claimant asserted that it is entitled
to receive training compensation from the Respondent in the amount of EUR
6,774.26, on the basis that the player was registered for the first time as a
professional with the Respondent and apparently on a club category III basis.
7.
In this context, the DRC judge noted that the Respondent rejects liability to pay
training compensation, indicating that the amount claimed, together with the
amount claimed by another club from country B in connection with the
registration of the player with the Respondent, was clearly disproportional in the
case at hand. In addition, the DRC judge noted that whereas the Respondent
referred to ‘solidarity contribution‘ in its reply, the Respondent made a clear
reference to the case at hand.
8.
The DRC judge then turned his attention to the Respondent’s argument that the
amount claimed by the Claimant, i.e. EUR 6,774.26, was disproportionate to the
amount of salary paid to the player.
Training compensation in relation to the Player E (Club A, from country B / Club C, from country D)
3/7
9.
In this respect, the DRC judge referred to art. 5 par. 1 and par. 2 of Annexe 4 of
the Regulations which inter alia stipulate that “(…) the first time a player registers
as a professional, the training compensation payable is calculated by taking the
training costs of the new club multiplied by the number of years of training (…)”.
The argument of the Respondent, which focuses exclusively on the
disproportionality between the amount claimed and the salary paid to the player,
was deemed irrelevant by the DRC judge as the calculation of training
compensation is based on the training costs of the new club, that is, on the costs
that would have been incurred by the Respondent if it had trained the player
itself, and was therefore rejected.
10.
In continuation, and hereby referring to the rules applicable to training
compensation, the DRC judge stated that as established in art. 1 par. 1 of Annexe
4 in combination with art. 2 par. 1 lit. i of Annexe 4 of the 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 before
the end of the season of the player’s 23rd birthday.
11.
Following the above, the DRC judge pointed out that the Football Federation
from country D had confirmed that the player was registered as a professional
with the Respondent on 16 January 2010. Equally, the DRC judge stressed that,
taking into account the player’s career history provided by the Football Federation
from country B, the player had at all times been registered as an amateur prior to
his registration as a professional with the Respondent.
12.
On account of the above considerations, the DRC judge decided that the
Respondent is liable to pay training compensation to the Claimant in accordance
with art. 20 and Annexe 4 of the Regulations.
13.
Turning his attention to the calculation of the training compensation payable by
the Respondent to the Claimant, the DRC judge referred to the FIFA circular no.
1185 dated 22 April 2009 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 stipulates 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.
Training compensation in relation to the Player E (Club A, from country B / Club C, from country D)
4/7
14.
With this having been established, the DRC judge noted that according to the
information contained in the Transfer Matching System, the Respondent was a
category III club at the time of registration of the player. Consequently, the DRC
judge concluded that category III shall apply to the Respondent which, moreover,
appears to be the club category on which the Claimant has based its claim.
15.
In continuation, the DRC judge took into account that the player, born on 29
January 1989, was registered with the Claimant as from 30 October 2009 until 28
July 2010.
16.
Consequently, taking into account the aforementioned considerations as well the
starting and ending dates of the relevant sporting season in country B (cf. point I.3
above), the DRC judge decided that the Respondent is liable to pay training
compensation to the Claimant in the amount of EUR 6,774.26.
17.
Moreover, taking into consideration the Claimant’s claim as well as art. 3 par. 2 of
Annexe 4 of the Regulations, the DRC judge decided that the Respondent has to
pay, in conformity with the DRC’s longstanding practice, interest at 5% p.a. over
the amount payable as training compensation as of the 31st day following the
registration of the player with the Respondent, i.e. as of 16 February 2010, until
the date of effective payment.
18.
Lastly, the DRC 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 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.
19.
In respect of the above, the DRC judge held that the amount to be taken into
consideration in the present proceedings is EUR 6,774.26 related to the claim of
the Claimant. Consequently, the DRC judge concluded the maximum amount of
costs of the proceedings corresponds to CHF 5,000 (cf. table in Annexe A).
20.
As a result, and taking into account the complexity of the case, the DRC judge
determined that the costs of the current proceedings amounting to CHF 3,000
shall be borne by the Respondent.
Training compensation in relation to the Player E (Club A, from country B / Club C, from country D)
5/7
*****
III.
Decision of the DRC judge
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Club A, is partially accepted.
2.
The Respondent, Club C, has to pay to the Claimant, within 30 days as from the
date of notification of this decision, the amount of EUR 6,774.26 plus interest of
5% p.a. as from 16 February 2010 until the date of effective payment.
3.
In the event that the aforementioned sum 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 is rejected.
5.
The final amount of costs of the proceedings in the amount of CHF 3,000 is to be
paid by the Respondent 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.:
UBS Zurich
Account number 366.677.01U (FIFA Players’ Status)
Clearing number 230
IBAN: CH27 0023 0230 3666 7701U
SWIFT: UBSWCHZH80A
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 DRC judge of every payment received.
*****
Training compensation in relation to the Player E (Club A, from country B / Club C, from country D)
6/7
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:
______________________
Jérôme Valcke
Secretary General
Enclosed: CAS directives
Training compensation in relation to the Player E (Club A, from country B / Club C, from country D)
7/7