Training Compensation
Texto da decisão
Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 2 November 2007,
in the following composition:
Slim Aloulou (Tunisia), Chairman
Gerardo Movilla (Spain), member
John Didulica (Australia), member
Essa M. Saleh Al-Housani (U.A.E.), member
Mohamed Mecherara (Algeria), member
on the claim presented by the club,
X,
as “Claimant”
against the club,
Y,
as “Respondent”
regarding training compensation in connection with the player Z.
I.
Facts of the case
1.
The player, U, was born on 28 March 1985.
2.
According to the player passport issued by the Football Federation of X (hereinafter: X
Federation), the player was registered as an amateur player as follows:
a. X - 1 July 1999 until 30 June 2000
b. X - 23 January 2001 until 9 April 2001
c. W - 3 May 2001 until 13 June 2001
3.
According to the same passport, X has been allocated club category 3.
4.
The Football Federation of Y has confirmed that the player was registered as an
amateur with Y on 24 July 2001 and that he signed an employment contract with Y on
1 July 2004.
5.
Y has been allocated club category 1.
6.
On 12 June 2006, X lodged a claim against Y in front of FIFA maintaining that it is
entitled to receive from Y training compensation to the amount EUR 60,000 for the
1999/2000 season during which the player was trained at X.
7.
Y, for its part, rejects the claim put forward by X asserting that according to the player
he never played for X but for V. Therefore, X cannot claim any training compensation
for the player Z.
8.
Furthermore, should it appear that X did train the player, then Y is of the opinion that
no training compensation is payable since the former club of the player, W, with which
club the player allegedly had signed a contract for the 2000-01 season, did not offer
the player a contract for the 2001-02 season.
9.
FIFA’s invitation to Y to provide a copy of the employment contract that the player
allegedly signed with W remained unanswered.
10.
Finally, Y points out that on 28 March 2000, the player celebrated his 15th birthday.
Therefore, according to the FIFA Regulations, the maximum that could be claimed by X
is EUR 10,000 per season based on club category 4.
11.
On behalf of its member club, the X Federation has clarified that X is the club that was
previously referred to as V and that it has gone through a procedure in order to change
its name. Relevant documentation has been presented by the X Federation at FIFA’s
request.
2
12.
The X Federation asserts that no professional contract was signed between W and the
player in question and should such contract have been signed, it would have needed to
be registered by the X Federation.
13.
Furthermore, X asserts that Y’s argument relating to the fact that W has not offered a
contract to the player is irrelevant and solely would concern W.
14.
X admits that its initial claim should be reduced to EUR 10,000 pertaining to the 199900 season.
15.
On 20 July 2007, X modified its claim on the basis of the newly issued player passport to
also include EUR 15,000 for the period of time that the player was registered during
the 2000-01 season (season of player’s 16th birthday – category 3 to 1 - EUR 60,000 x
3/12).
16.
Therefore, the Claimant maintains that it is entitled to receive the total amount of EUR
25,000 as training compensation from Y.
17.
In spite of FIFA’s invitation, Y has not presented any comments on the modified claim.
II.
Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
First of all, the Chamber analysed whether it was competent to deal with the matter at
stake. In this respect, it referred to art. 18 par. 2 and 3 of the Rules Governing the
Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber. The
present matter was submitted to FIFA on 12 June 2006, as a consequence the Chamber
concluded that the revised Rules Governing Procedures (edition 2005) on matters
pending before the decision making bodies of FIFA are applicable to the matter at
hand.
2.
With regard to the competence of the Chamber, art. 3 par. 1 of the above-mentioned
Rules states that the Dispute Resolution Chamber shall examine its jurisdiction in the
light of articles 22 to 24 of the Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players
(edition 2005). In accordance with art. 24 par. 1 in combination with art. 22 (d) of the
aforementioned Regulations, the Dispute Resolution Chamber shall adjudicate on
disputes between two clubs belonging to different Associations related to training
compensation.
3.
As a consequence, the Dispute Resolution Chamber is the competent body to decide on
the present litigation concerning the training compensation claimed by the Claimant
for the training and education of the player Z.
3
4.
Subsequently, the members of the Chamber analyzed which edition of the Regulations
for the Status and Transfer of Players should be applicable as to the substance of the
matter. In this respect, the Chamber referred to art. 26 par. 1 and 2 of the Regulations
for the Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2005) and FIFA circular no. 995 dated 23
September 2005. Furthermore, it acknowledged that the player, Z, had been registered
as a professional for Y on or about 1 July 2004. Equally the Chamber took note that
the claim was lodged at FIFA on 12 June 2006. In view of the aforementioned, the
Chamber concluded that the FIFA Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players
(edition 2001, hereafter: the Regulations) are applicable to the case at hand as to the
substance.
5.
In continuation, and entering into the substance of the matter, the members of the
Chamber started by acknowledging that Y and the player in question signed an
employment contract on 1 July 2004 and that, subsequently, the player was registered
as a professional with Y on or about 1 July 2004.
6.
The Chamber pointed out that according to Chapter VII of the Regulations and Chapter
III of the Regulations governing the Application of the Regulations training
compensation shall be paid to a player’s training club when a player signs his first
contract as a professional and on each transfer of a professional between clubs of two
different Associations until the end of the Season of his 23rd birthday for training
incurred up to the age of 21, unless it is evident that a player has already terminated
his training period before the age of 21.
7.
Furthermore, the members of the Chamber took into account that X, on the one hand,
claims being entitled to the amount of EUR 25,000 as training compensation payable by
Y. Y, for its part, considers that X has not trained the player, Z, as allegedly confirmed
by the player himself. Furthermore, Y deems that no training compensation is payable
to X in the light of the alleged fact that the player’s former club, W, with which club
the player purportedly had signed an employment contract, has not offered any
employment contract to the player in question.
8.
The Chamber also noted that during the proceedings in the present case X had reduced
its initial claim to the amount of EUR 10,000 for the 1999-00 season in accordance with
the comments made by Y and then amended its claim by adding the amount of EUR
15,000 relating to the 2000-01 season, as a result of which X claims being entitled to
the total amount of EUR 25,000.
9.
The members of the Chamber took into consideration that Y has not presented any
response to the additional claim of EUR 15,000 relating to training compensation for
the 2000-01 season.
10.
Turning its attention to the arguments put forward by Y in the context of X’s initial
claim, the Chamber duly noted that the X Federation has clarified the situation
surrounding the change of name of the Claimant from V to X. After careful study of
4
the documentation presented by the X Federation in this regard and taking into
consideration the player passport issued by the said Federation, the Chamber
confirmed that X must be considered the club that trained and educated the player, Z,
as from 1 July 1999 until 30 June 2000 and as from 23 January 2001 until 9 April 2001 as
set out in the above-mentioned player passport.
11.
Moreover, Y asserts that the player, Z, had signed an employment contract with his
former club W for the 2000-01 season and that this club had not offered any
employment contract to the player, Z, prior to his move to Y. In this respect, the
members of the Chamber pointed out that Y obviously invokes art. 5 par. 5 of the
Regulations Governing the Application of the Regulations. It was duly noted that Y has
failed to produce any documentary evidence in support of such allegations, in spite of
having been invited by FIFA to do so. What is more, the X Federation has confirmed
that the player in question was registered with W as an amateur pointing out that no
employment contract was in place between Z and W. The Chamber also acknowledged
that the relevant player passport indicates that the player, Z, was registered as an
amateur with both X and W. In any event, in this context, the Chamber deemed it fit to
point out that in accordance with art. 5 par. 5 of the Regulations Governing the
Application of the Regulations, the relevant provision invoked by Y is without prejudice
to the rights to Training Compensation of the player’s previous club(s).
12.
Taking into consideration the above, the Chamber had to reject the arguments put
forward by Y.
13.
On account of the above, the Chamber came to the conclusion that the player, Z,
signed his first contract as a professional with Y and that in accordance with art. 14 of
the Regulations X is entitled to receive training compensation from Y for the training
of the player, Z.
14.
The Chamber then turned to art. 7 of the Regulations Governing the Application of the
Regulations as well as FIFA circular nr. 826 dated 31 October 2002 which provide details
on the calculation of training compensation. The Chamber recalled that the present
case involves a player moving from one Association to another inside the territory of
the EU/EEA. Consequently, art. 7 par. 4 of the Regulations Governing the Application of
the Regulations shall be taken into consideration when determining the amount of
training compensation.
15.
The members of the Chamber recalled that the player was born on 28 March 1985 and
that he was registered with X as from 1 July 1999 until 30 June 2000 and as from 23
January 2001 until 9 April 2001 according to the player passport issued by the X
Federation. In this respect, the Chamber pointed out that the amount payable is
calculated on a pro rata basis according to the period of training that the player spent
with the relevant club.
5
16.
The amount due by Y has to be calculated on the basis of art. 7 par. 2 and par. 4 of the
Regulations Governing the Application of the Regulations and with the parameters
provided by FIFA circular nr. 826 dated 31 October 2002.
17.
Consequently, taking into account the above-mentioned elements, X is entitled to
receive training compensation from Y to the amount of EUR 20,000.
18.
Therefore, the Chamber decided that Y is liable to pay to X training compensation
amounting to EUR 20,000.
*****
6
III.
Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, X, is partially accepted.
2.
The Respondent, Y, has to pay the amount of EUR 20,000 to the Claimant within 30
days as from the date of notification of this decision.
3.
If the sum of EUR 20,000 is not paid by Y within the aforementioned time limit, an
interest rate of 5% per year will apply as of expiry of the said time limit and the matter
shall be submitted to the FIFA Disciplinary Committee for its consideration and
decision.
4.
Any further claim of the Claimant is rejected.
5.
The Claimant is directed to inform the Respondent immediately of the account number
to which the remittance is to be made and to notify the Dispute Resolution Chamber of
every payment received.
6.
According to art. 61 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:
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 Dispute Resolution Chamber:
Markus Kattner
Deputy General Secretary
Enclosed: CAS directives
7