Training Compensation
Texto da decisão
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) judge
passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 6 November 2014,
by Theo van Seggelen (Netherlands), DRC judge,
on the claim presented by the club,
Club T, from country B
as Claimant
against the club,
Club F, from country S
as Respondent
regarding training compensation in connection with the player F
I.
Facts of the case
1.
The country B Football Federation confirmed that the player, Player F
(hereinafter: the player), born in January 1991, was registered with its
affiliated club, Club T (hereinafter: the Claimant), as from 8 May 2007 until 7
April 2009 as an amateur.
2.
Furthermore, the aforementioned player passport indicated that:
- from 8 April 2009 until 31 December 2009, the player was registered as an
amateur with the Club J, from country B;
- from 1 January 2010 until 4 April 2010, “no record found”;
- from 5 April 2010 until 25 January 2011, the player was registered as an
amateur with the Club C, from country B
3.
The country B Football Federation confirmed that the sporting season in
country B follows the calendar year.
4.
Pursuant to the player passport issued by the country S Football Association,
the player was registered with its affiliated club, Club S (hereinafter: the
Respondent), on 2 February 2011 as a “non-amateur”.
5.
The said player passport also indicates that the Respondent belonged to the
category III (indicative amount of EUR 30,000 per year) during the season when
the player was registered with it.
6.
On 31 August 2012, UR 73,479.45, plus 5% interest p.a. “since the 31st day after
the registration of the player with the association of his new club”. the
Claimant contacted FIFA asking for the payment of training compensation
from the Respondent on the basis that the player signed his first professional
contract with the Respondent on 1 January 2011. After amending its claim on
17 December 2013, the Claimant is claiming training compensation in the
amount of E
7.
In its reply to the claim, the Respondent sustained that the player was
registered at the country S Football Association as an amateur and that the
process of the player’s registration was conducted outside of the Transfer
Matching System (TMS). The Respondent also acknowledged that on 1 January
2011, it signed with the player an employment contract, valid as of the date of
signature until 31 December 2013. Pursuant to said employment contract, the
Training compensation in connection with the player F
(Club T, from country B / Club F, from country S)
2
player was entitled to a monthly salary of EUR 900 for 2011, EUR 1,100 for 2012
and EUR 1,300 for 2013.
8.
In view of the foregoing, the Respondent held that the Claimant is not entitled
to training compensation and requested that the Claimant’s claim be declined.
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 31 August 2012. Consequently, the DRC judge concluded
that 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. 2 and par.
3 of the Procedural Rules).
2.
Subsequently, the DRC judge referred to art. 3 par. 2 of the Procedural Rules,
which states that the DRC judge shall examine his jurisdiction in accordance
with art. 24 par. 2 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players
(edition 2014). In accordance with art. 24 par. 1 and par. 2 lit. ii. in connection
with art. 22 lit. d) of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players
(hereinafter: the Regulations), the DRC judge is competent to decide on the
present matter relating to training compensation between clubs belonging to
different associations.
3.
Furthermore, the DRC judge analysed which edition of the Regulations 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 (editions 2010, 2012
and 2014) and, on the other hand, to the fact that the present claim was
lodged on 31 August 2012 and that the player was registered with the
Respondent on 2 February 2011. In view of the aforementioned, the DRC judge
concluded that the 2010 edition of 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 this
respect, the DRC judge started by acknowledging all the above-mentioned
facts as well as the arguments and the documentation submitted by the
parties. However, the DRC judge emphasised that in the following
considerations he will refer only to the facts, arguments and documentary
Training compensation in connection with the player F
(Club T, from country B / Club F, from country S)
3
evidence which he considered pertinent for the assessment of the matter at
hand.
5.
First of all, the DRC judge recalled that the player, born in January 1991, was,
according to the player passport provided by the country B Football
Federation, registered with the Claimant as from 8 May 2007 until 7 April 2009
as an amateur.
6.
In continuation, the DRC judge took note that the Claimant asserted that it
was entitled to receive training compensation from the Respondent in the
amount of EUR 73,479.45, since the player had signed his first professional
contract with the Respondent before the end of the season of his 23 rd
birthday.
7.
Furthermore, the DRC judge duly noted that the Respondent sustained having
registered the player as an amateur and therefore, there is no training
compensation due to the Claimant.
8.
However, the DRC judge observed that the Respondent acknowledged having
signed a contract with the player, according to which the player was entitled
to a monthly salary in the amounts of EUR 900 for 2011, EUR 1,100 for 2012
and EUR 1,300 for 2013.
9.
Having established the above, the DRC 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. 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 professional is registered for
the first time as a professional before the end of the season of the player’s
23rd birthday. 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.
10.
Following the above, the DRC judge pointed out that the player passport
issued by the country B Football Federation indicates that the player was
registered as an amateur in two subsequent country B clubs for the period
between 8 April 2009 and 25 January 2011. Moreover, the DRC judge duly
noted that as per the player passport issued by the country S Football
Training compensation in connection with the player F
(Club T, from country B / Club F, from country S)
4
Association, the player was registered with the Respondent on 2 February 2011
as a “non-amateur”.
11.
On account of the above considerations, the DRC judge concluded that it could
indeed be established that the player had been registered for the first time as
a professional with the Respondent. In this regard, 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.
12.
Subsequently, the DRC judge considered that it 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 DRC judge went on to establish
the proper calculation of the relevant training compensation due to the
Claimant.
13.
To that end, the DRC 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.
14.
In continuation, the DRC judge recalled that the player was born in January
1991 and was registered with the Claimant as from 8 May 2007 until 7 April
2009.
15.
Equally, the DRC judge recalled that, according to the player passport issued by
the country S Football Association, the player was registered with the
Respondent on 2 February 2011 and the Respondent belonged to the category
III (indicative amount of EUR 30,000 per year) during the season when the
player was registered with it.
16.
On account of the above, the DRC judge considered that the Claimant is thus
entitled to receive training compensation for the period as from 8 May 2007
until 7 April 2009, i.e. for 8 months of the season of the player’s 16th birthday,
for the complete season of the player’s 17th birthday as well as for 3 months
of the season of the player’s 18th birthday. In view of the foregoing, and
considering art. 5 par. 3 of Annexe 4 of the Regulations, the DRC judge
decided that the Respondent is liable to pay the amount of EUR 57,000 to the
Claimant as training compensation in relation to the registration of the player
with the Respondent.
17.
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
Training compensation in connection with the player F
(Club T, from country B / Club F, from country S)
5
proceedings before the DRC judge relating to disputes regarding training
compensation, costs in the maximum amount of currency of country H 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.
18.
In respect of the above, the Chamber held that the amount to be taken into
consideration in the present proceedings is EUR 73,479.45 related to the claim
of the Claimant. Consequently, the Chamber concluded that the maximum
amount of costs of the proceedings corresponds to currency of country H
10,000 (cf. table in Annexe A).
19.
As a result, considering the degree of success, the DRC judge determined the
final costs of the current proceedings to the amount of currency of country H
10,000, which currency of country H 8,000 shall be borne by the Respondent
and currency of country H 2,000 by the Claimant.
III.
Decision of the DRC judge
1.
The claim of the Claimant is partially accepted.
2.
The Respondent has to pay to the Claimant, within 30 days as from the date
of notification of this decision, the amount of EUR 57,500 plus 5% interest p.a.
as of 5 March 2011 until the date of effective payment.
3.
In the event that 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 is rejected.
5.
The final costs of the proceedings in the amount of currency of country H
10,000 are to be paid, within 30 days of notification of the present decision,
as follows:
5.1
The amount of currency of country H 8,000 by the Respondent to FIFA to the
following bank account with reference to case no.:
Training compensation in connection with the player F
(Club T, from country B / Club F, from country S)
6
5.2
The amount of currency of country H 2,000 by the Claimant to FIFA. Given that
the Claimant has already paid the amount of currency of country H 2,000 as
advance of costs at the start of the present proceedings, no additional amount
has to be paid to FIFA.
6.
The Claimant is directed to inform the Respondent immediately and directly of
the account number to which the remittance under point 2 is to be made and
to notify the DRC judge of every payment received.
*****
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:
Training compensation in connection with the player F
(Club T, from country B / Club F, from country S)
7
Markus Kattner
Deputy Secretary General
Encl.
CAS directives
Training compensation in connection with the player F
(Club T, from country B / Club F, from country S)
8