Training Compensation
Texto da decisão
Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 30 November 2007,
in the following composition:
Slim Aloulou (Tunisia), Chairman
Mario Gallavotti (Italy), member
Zola Malvern Percival Majavu (South Africa), member
Rinaldo Martorelli (Brazil), member
Michele Colucci (Italy), member
on the claim presented by the
Club X,
as “Claimant”
against the
Club Z,
as “Respondent”
regarding training compensation in connection with the player Y.
I.
Facts of the case
1.
According to the player’s passport forwarded by the club’s X Football Federation, the
player Y, born on 4 March 1986, was registered with the club X (hereinafter: the
Claimant) as an amateur from 11 January 2000 to 20 July 2004 and as a professional
from 20 July 2004. The corresponding employment contract was valid from 6 July
2004 to 30 July 2005 and was unilaterally extended by the Claimant until the
2005/2006 football season.
2.
On 2 August 2006 the player Y signed an employment contract with the club Z
(hereinafter: the Respondent) which was valid until 31 May 2007.
3.
On 28 September 2006, the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee authorised
the provisional registration of the player with the Respondent.
4.
On 20 October 2006, the Claimant submitted a complaint to FIFA against the
Respondent regarding training compensation in connection with the player Y.
5.
In its complaint, the Claimant mentioned that it is the Dispute Resolution Chamber’s
responsibility to set the amount of compensation and that the player had been
trained for four years before signing his first employment contract with the club on 6
July 2004.
6.
According to a confirmation received from the Respondent’s Football Association on
22 June 2007, its affiliate would be a category 4 club.
7.
According to a confirmation received from the Claimant’s Football Federation, its
affiliate is a category 2 club.
8.
The Respondent submitted its statement on these proceedings to FIFA on 8 June 2007.
In said statement, it mentioned that in accordance with art. 2 of annex 4 of the FIFA
Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players, training compensation is not due if
the player is transferred to a category 4 club and that since the Respondent is a
category 4 club, the Claimant is not entitled to claim training compensation for the
player in question.
2
9.
The Respondent further submitted that according to the decision taken by the Single
Judge of the Players’ Status Committee on 28 September 2006 and concerning the
provisional registration of the player Y for the club Z, the player was eligible to
transfer to the club of his choice and the Claimant therefore has no right to claim
training compensation for him.
10.
In two documents sent to FIFA by the Respondent’s Football Association on 8 April
2005 and 13 April 2006, respectively, the Association in question indicated that all of
its affiliates were category 3 clubs.
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 20 October 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 Y.
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) in accordance
with the FIFA circular no. 995 dated 23 September 2005. Furthermore, it
acknowledged that the professional had been registered for his new club in
September 2006. Equally the Chamber took note that the claim was lodged at FIFA on
20 October 2006. In view of the aforementioned, the Chamber concluded that the
FIFA Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2005; 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 the club Z and the player Y signed an
employment contract on 2 August 2006 and that, subsequently, the player was
registered as a professional with the club in question in September 2006.
6.
Furthermore, the members of the Chamber took into account that from the
documentation at its disposal it can be noted that the Claimant is the last club with
which the player in question was registered prior to his transfer to the Respondent.
7.
The Dispute Resolution Chamber noted that the club X claims that it is entitled to
receive training compensation due to the fact that the player in question had been
trained for four years before signing his first employment contract with the club X on
6 July 2004.
8.
The Respondent, however, denies that training compensation would be due to the
club X due to the fact that in accordance with art. 2 of annex 4 of the Regulations,
training compensation is not due if the player is transferred to a category 4 club,
which would be the case in the present matter. Equally, the members of the Chamber
took note that the Respondent refuses to pay training compensation considering that
in accordance with the decision taken by the Single Judge of the Players’ Status
Committee on 28 September 2006, the player was eligible to transfer to the club of
his choice and therefore the Claimant has no right to claim training compensation for
the relevant player.
4
9.
In this respect, the Dispute Resolution Chamber considered the two documents sent
to FIFA by the Respondent’s Football Association on 8 April 2005 and 13 April 2006,
respectively, indicating that all of its affiliated clubs were allocated in category 3.
Indeed and due to the neutral aspects of this communications with regard to the
present procedure, the Chamber decided to consider these documents and to exclude
the correspondence received on 22 June 2007 from the relevant Football Association
concerning the categorisation of its affiliate in the present procedure.
10.
As a consequence, the Chamber deemed that the argument put forward by the
Respondent concerning the refusal for the payment of the training compensation due
to the transfer to a club pertaining to a fourth category must be rejected, considering
that the Respondent must be allocated in a 3 category club.
11.
Equally and concerning the allegations of the Respondent with regard to the decision
taken by the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee on 28 September 2006,
the members of the Chamber outlined that the decision in question was taken
without prejudice to a decision which will be taken by the Dispute Resolution
Chamber and regarding the training compensation for the player Y. Consequently,
the Chamber decided to reject also the second argument of the Respondent.
12.
The Chamber then turned to art. 20 and annex 4 of the Regulations which stipulate,
inter alia, that training compensation shall be paid to a player’s training club when a
Professional is transferred between clubs of two different Associations, whether
during or at the end of his contract, until the end of the season of his 23rd birthday
for training incurred up to the age of 21.
13.
The members of the Chamber recalled that the player was born on 4 March 1986 and
that the Claimant is claiming training compensation for four years before the player
in question signed his first professional contract in July 2004.
14.
On account of all of the above-mentioned considerations, the Chamber concurred
that the club X is entitled to receive training compensation from the club Z for the
training and education of the relevant player during these four years, as claimed by
the relevant club X.
5
15.
The amount due by the club Z has to be calculated in accordance with art. 5 and art. 6
of annex 4 of the Regulations and with the parameters provided by FIFA circular no.
959 dated 16 March 2005. As a consequence, the Chamber concluded that the
training compensation has to be calculated with an amount corresponding to EUR
10,000 per year of training on a pro rata basis for the football seasons 1999/2000 and
2000/2001 in accordance with art. 5 par. 3 of the Regulations (corresponding to club
category 4 of the European Football Confederation). In continuation and for the
seasons 2001/2002 to 2003/2004, the amount due has to be calculated in accordance
with art. 6 par. 1 b) of annex 4 of the Regulations and with the parameters provided
by the aforementioned circular, i.e. with an amount corresponding to EUR 30,000 per
year of training (corresponding to club category 3 of the European Football
Confederation).
16.
Consequently and taking into account all the above-mentioned elements, the Dispute
Resolution Chamber decided that the claim of the club X is accepted and the
Respondent is liable to pay to the Claimant training compensation amounting to EUR
105,000 in connection with the player Y.
6
III.
Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, the club X, is accepted.
2.
The Respondent, the club Z, has to pay the amount of EUR 105,000 to the Claimant
within 30 days as from the date of notification of this decision.
3.
If the sum of EUR 105,000 is not paid by the club Z 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 reported to the FIFA Disciplinary Committee for its consideration
and decision.
4.
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.
5.
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:
Jérôme Valcke
General Secretary
Enclosed: CAS directives
7