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 2 October 2019,
by Mr S tefano S artori (Italy ),
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, Player E
I.
Facts of the cas e
1.
According to the player passports issued by the Football Association of Country B
(hereinafter: the Football Association F), the player, Player E (hereinafter: the
player), born on 31 October 1995, was registered with Club A (hereafter: the
Claimant) as from 24 July 2015 until 6 January 2016 on loan from the Club of
Country B, Club F (hereinafter: the former club).
2.
The football season in Country B during the relevant period of time ran as follows:
from 1 July of the respective year until 30 June of the following year.
3.
According to the information contained in the TMS, the player was registered with
the Club of Country D, Club C (hereinafter: the Respondent), on 6 February 2018,
which engaged the player “permanently (out of contract)” directly from the former
club. In this respect, the Respondent uploaded on TMS two letters signed by the
Claimant, in which it is indicated that the player and the Claimant terminated their
contractual relationship on 24 January 2018 and that the player “shall be free to
leave Club F (free transfer) during the transfer window of January 2018”.
4.
Equally, according to the information contained in the TMS, the Claimant belonged
to the category I (indicative amount of EUR 90,000 per year within UEFA) whilst the
Respondent belonged to the category II (indicative amount of EUR 60,000 per year
within UEFA) at the moment that the player was registered with the latter.
5.
On 9 May 2019, the Claimant lodged a claim in front of FIFA requesting training
compensation on the ground that the player’s subsequent transfer as a professional
occurred before the end of the season of the player’s 23rd birthday. In particular,
the Claimant requested EUR 25,000, plus 5% interest as from “the due date”.
6.
In its reply, the Respondent solely declared to be open to discuss the matter prior
to a decision being rendered.
7.
In reply, the Claimant indicated that no amicable solution had been found and
requested the matter to be submitted for decision.
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 DRC (hereinafter: the
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 9
May 2019. Consequently, the 2018 edition of the Rules Governing the Procedures
Training compensation in connection with the player, Player E
(Club A, Country B / Club C, Country D)
2
of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter:
the Procedural Rules) is applicable to the matter at hand (cf. art. 21 of the 2018
edition of the Procedural Rules).
2.
Subsequently, the Single Judge referred to art. 3 par. 2 of the Procedural Rules,
which states that he shall examine his jurisdiction in light of art. 24 par. 2 of the
Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (edition June 2019). In accordance
with art. 3 of Annexe 6 in conjunction with art. 24 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.
3.
Furthermore, the Single 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 confirmed that in accordance with art. 26 par. 1 and 2 of
said regulations (editions January 2018, June 2018 and June 2019) and considering
that the player was registered with the Respondent on 6 February 2018, the January
2018 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 Single Judge and the applicable regulations having been
established, and entering into the substance of the matter, the Single Judge started
by acknowledging the above-mentioned facts as well as the documentation
contained in the file. However, the Single Judge emphasised 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.
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 25,000, indicating that the transfer of the player occurred before the end of
the season of his 23rd birthday.
6.
Furthermore, the Single Judge noted that the Respondent, despite having been
invited to do so, failed to present its response to the claim of the Claimant, merely
stating that it apparently wished to settle the matter amicably, and, in this way,
renounced its right to defence.
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, in other words
upon the statements and documents presented by the Claimant.
Training compensation in connection with the player, Player E
(Club A, Country B / Club C, Country D)
3
8.
Having established the above, the Single Judge referred to the rules applicable to
training compensation and stated that, as established in art. 1 par. 1 of Annexe 4
in combination with art. 2 par. 1 lit. ii. 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 professional is transferred between clubs of two different
associations before the end of the season of the player’s 23rd birthday. In case of a
subsequent transfer of a professional, art. 3 par. 1 of Annexe 4 of the Regulations
sets forth that the club with which the player is registered is responsible for paying
training compensation to the former club, for the time the player was effectively
trained by the latter, within 30 days of registration.
9.
Furthermore, according to art. 10 par. 1 of the Regulations, professionals may be
loaned to another club on the basis of a written agreement between the
professional and the clubs concerned. Moreover, the last sentence of said provision
stipulates that any such loan is subject to the same rules as those which apply to
the transfer of players, including the provisions on training compensation and the
solidarity mechanism.
10.
Following the above, the Single Judge stressed that one of the aims of the last
sentence of art. 10 par. 1 of the Regulations is to ensure that training clubs which
register a player on a loan basis also benefit from the solidarity mechanism and
training compensation, provided that the relevant prerequisites in the pertinent
provisions of the Regulations are fulfilled. This approach is also in line with the
DRC’s well-established jurisprudence that all clubs which have contributed to the
training and education of a player as from the age of 12 are, in principle, entitled
to training compensation for the timeframe that the player was effectively trained
by them.
11.
In other words, the Single Judge emphasised that the nature of the player’s
registration with a club claiming training compensation, i.e. on a definite or on a
temporary basis, is in fact irrelevant with respect to the question as to whether such
club would be entitled to receive training compensation for the period of time that
the player was effectively trained by that club.
12.
In this respect, the Single Judge duly noted that the player was registered with the
Claimant as from 24 July 2015 until 6 January 2016 on loan from the Club of Country
B, Club F, that is to say prior to the end of the season of the player’s 21 st birthday.
13.
In addition, the Single Judge observed that the player registered with the
Respondent on 6 February 2018 as an out of contract player directly from the
former club, that is to say prior to the end of the season of the player’s 23rd birthday.
Training compensation in connection with the player, Player E
(Club A, Country B / Club C, Country D)
4
14.
In view of the foregoing considerations, the Single Judge concluded that it can be
established that the player was subsequently transferred as a professional between
two clubs of two different associations before the end of the season of his
23rd birthday and, thus, concluded that the Respondent is liable to pay training
compensation to the Claimant for the training of the player in accordance with art.
20 as well as Annexe 4 of the Regulations.
15.
Subsequently, the Single Judge considered that he had to determine which should
be the relevant amount of training compensation to be paid by the Respondent to
the Claimant. In this regard, the Single Judge went on to establish the proper
calculation of the relevant training compensation due to the Claimant.
16.
To that end, the Single Judge referred 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, it is necessary to take the costs that would have been incurred by
the new club if it had trained the player itself. What is more, 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.
17.
In continuation, the Single Judge recalled that the player was born on 31 October
1995 and was registered with the Claimant on loan from 24 July 2015 until 6
January 2016. Furthermore, the Single Judge noted that the player was
subsequently transferred from the former club to the Respondent.
18.
On account of the above, the Single Judge considered that the Claimant is, thus,
entitled to receive training compensation for the period as from 24 July 2015 until
6 January 2016, i.e. 5 months of the season of the player’s 20th birthday.
19.
Furthermore, the Single Judge recalled that, according to the information
contained in the TMS, the player was registered with the Respondent on 6 February
2018.
20.
Equally, the Single Judge recalled that, according to the information contained in
the TMS, the Claimant belonged to the category I (UEFA indicative amount of EUR
90,000 per year) whilst the Respondent belonged to the category II at the moment
of the player’s registration with it (UEFA indicative amount of EUR 60,000 per year).
21.
In this regard, the Single Judge pointed out that, according to art. 6 par. 1 lit. b) of
Annexe 4 of the Regulations, if a player moves from a club of a higher training
category to a lower training category, the calculation shall be based on the training
costs of the lower category club.
Training compensation in connection with the player, Player E
(Club A, Country B / Club C, Country D)
5
22.
Consequently, in light of the above-mentioned considerations as well as the claim
of the Claimant, and in line with the provisions set out in art. 6 par. 1 lit. b), the
Chamber decided to accept the Claimant’s claim and decided that the Respondent
is liable to pay training compensation to the Claimant in the amount of EUR 25,000.
23.
Moreover, taking into consideration the Claimant’s claim as well as art. 3 par. 2 of
Annexe 4 of the Regulations, the Single Judge decided that the Respondent has to
pay, in conformity with the longstanding practice of the DRC, interest of 5% p.a.
over the amount payable as training compensation as of 9 March 2018 until the
date of effective payment.
24.
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 Annexe A of the Procedural Rules, the costs of the
proceedings are to be levied on the basis of the amount in dispute.
25.
In respect of the above, the Single Judge held that the amount to be taken into
consideration in the present proceedings is EUR 25,000 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 Annexe A of the
Procedural Rules).
26.
As a result, the Single Judge determined the final costs of the current proceedings
in the amount of CHF 5,000 that shall be borne by the Respondent.
*****
Training compensation in connection with the player, Player E
(Club A, Country B / Club C, Country D)
6
III. Decis ion of the S ingle Judge of the sub-com m ittee of the DRC
1. The claim of the Claimant, Club A, is 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 25,000 + 5% interest p.a. as
from 9 March 2018 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. The final costs of the proceedings in the amount of CHF 5,000 are to be paid by the
Respondent, w ithin 30 day s of notification of the present decision, 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
Training compensation in connection with the player, Player E
(Club A, Country B / Club C, Country D)
7
5. 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
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
Encl.: CAS directives
Training compensation in connection with the player, Player E
(Club A, Country B / Club C, Country D)
8