Solidarity Contribution
Texto da decisão
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) judge
passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 18 December 2012,
in the following composition:
by Theo van Seggelen (Netherlands), DRC judge,
on the claim presented by the club,
Club L, from country N
as Claimant
against the club,
Club O, from country F
as Respondent
regarding a solidarity contribution dispute
related to the transfer of the player J
I.
Facts of the case
1.
The country N Football Federation (hereinafter: country N Football Federation)
confirmed, that the country N player, J (hereinafter: the player), born in 1979, was
registered with its affiliated Club L (hereinafter: the Claimant) “since before the age of
12” until 9 July 1997.
2.
The football season in country N runs from 15 November until 14 November of the
following year.
3.
The player was registered with Club O (hereinafter: the Respondent) on 13 July 2005.
4.
On 1 June 2006, the Claimant contacted FIFA claiming its proportion of the solidarity
contribution in connection with the transfer of the player concerned from Club B, from
country T, to the Respondent, in the amount of EUR 157,500 plus interest in the amount
of EUR 64,575, amounting for a total of EUR 222,075, based on the alleged transfer
amount of EUR 7’000’000.
5.
In its reply, the Respondent indicated that all previous calculations regarding the
solidarity contribution for the transfer of the player Club B to the Respondent were
based on an old player passport issued by the country N Football Federation on 2
August 2006. According to a more recent player passport issued by the country N
Football Federation on 2 March 2010, the correct amount due to the Claimant, for the
period of 1 January 1991 and 30 June 1997, is EUR 140,000.
6.
After amending its claim on 12 April 2012, the Claimant requests EUR 140,000 plus
interest as from 31 July 2005.
7.
In its final position, the Respondent states that it refuses to pay interest on the claimed
solidarity contribution as the late payment is not due to the Respondent, but due to the
wrong player passport issued by the country N Football Federation.
8.
Lastly, the Respondent indicates that, since the transfer was completed in August 2005
and the last correspondences between the parties were exchanged in March 2010, the
case might already be prescribed.
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 1
June 2006. Consequently, the 2005 edition of the Rules Governing the Procedures of the
Solidarity contribution in connection with the player J
(Club L, from country N / Club O, from country F)
2/6
Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: the
Procedural Rules) are applicable to the matter at hand (cf. art. 18 par. 2 and 3 of the
Procedural Rules).
2.
Subsequently, the DRC judge referred to art. 3 par. 1 and 2 of the Procedural Rules and
confirmed that in accordance with art. 24 par. 1 and 2 in combination with art. 22 lit. (d)
of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2010, 2009, 2008 and
2005) (hereinafter: the Regulations), the DRC judge is competent to decide on the
present litigation with an international dimension concerning the distribution of the
solidarity contribution claimed by the Claimant in connection with the transfer of the
player from Club B to the Respondent.
3.
In continuation, the DRC judge analysed which regulations were 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, and considering that the present claim was lodged on 1
June 2006 and that the player was registered with the Respondent as a professional on
13 July 2005, the 2005 edition of said regulations was applicable to the matter at hand
as to the substance.
4.
In continuation, the DRC judge duly noted that the Respondent was of the opinion that
the present claim should be viewed as time-barred, since more than two years had
allegedly elapsed.
5.
In view of the above, the DRC judge deemed fundamental to underline that in order to
determine whether he could hear the present case, he should, first and foremost,
establish which is the event giving rise to the dispute, i.e. which is the starting point of
the time period of two years set out under art. 25 par. 5 of the Regulations. In this
respect, the DRC judge referred to art. 2 par. 1 of Annex 5 of the Regulations, which
stipulates that “The new club shall pay the solidarity contribution to the training club(s)
[…] no later than 30 days after the player’s registration or, in case of contingent
payments, 30 days after the date of such payments”.
6.
Reverting to the facts of the present case, the DRC judge emphasized that the player
was registered with the Respondent on 13 July 2005.
7.
On account of the foregoing, the DRC judge decided that the event giving rise to the
dispute, regarding the payment of solidarity contribution occurred 30 days after the
player’s registration with the Respondent.
8.
Therefore, the DRC judge came to the firm conclusion that, in casu, and in accordance
with art. 2 par. 1 of Annex 5 of the Regulations, the payment of the solidarity
contribution fell due on 12 August 2005, i.e. 30 days after the registration of the player
at the country N Football Federation, and that this latter date was the starting point of
Solidarity contribution in connection with the player J
(Club L, from country N / Club O, from country F)
3/6
the time period of two years set out under art. 25 par. 5 of the Regulations. Equally, the
Chamber held that the time period of two years had elapsed, in casu, on 13 August
2007.
9.
As a consequence, the DRC judge concluded that less than two years had elapsed
between the event giving rise to the dispute, i.e. the due date of payment of the
solidarity contribution, which was on 12 August 2005, and the submission of the present
claim to FIFA by the Claimant on 1 June 2006, and that therefore, the claim of the
Claimant for solidarity contribution can be heard by the DRC judge.
10.
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 above-mentioned facts and the documentation contained
in the file.
11.
Thereafter, the DRC judge acknowledged that as established in art. 21 in connection
with Annex 5 of the Regulations, as a general rule, the new club of the player has to
distribute as a solidarity contribution 5% of any compensation paid to the previous club
to the club(s) involved in the training and education of the player in proportion to the
number of years the player has been registered with the relevant club(s) between the
seasons of his 12th and 23rd birthday.
12.
In particular, the DRC judge noted that the Claimant had lodged a claim against the
Respondent, requesting its share of solidarity contribution related to the transfer of the
player from Club B to the Respondent in the amount of EUR 157,500 plus interest in the
amount of EUR 64,575, amounting for a total of EUR 222,075.
13.
Furthermore, the DRC judge then took note that the parties during the course of the
proceedings agreed that the correct registration period for when the player was
registered with the Claimant was as of 1 January 1991 until 30 June 1997.
14.
In addition to that, the DRC judge noted that the Respondent in its reply deemed that
the amount of EUR 140,000 was to be paid by the Respondent to the Claimant as
solidarity contribution.
15.
To that, the Claimant agreed on 12 April 2012 with its correspondence and requests
EUR 140,000 plus interest as of 31 July 2005.
16.
In view of the above that the parties could not reach an amicable settlement, the DRC
judge decided that the Claimant was entitled to receive from the Respondent the
undisputed amount of EUR 140,000 as solidarity contribution for the transfer of the
player from Club B to the Respondent.
Solidarity contribution in connection with the player J
(Club L, from country N / Club O, from country F)
4/6
17.
In continuation, the DRC judge noted that the Respondent in its final position refuses to
pay interest on the claimed solidarity contribution as the late payment is not due to the
Respondent, but due to the wrong player passport issued by the county N Football
Federation.
18.
In this regard, the DRC judge noted that the Respondent held that the delayed payment
resulted from the existence of multiple passports for the player, allegedly issued by the
country N Football Federation, which is why, according to the Respondent, the
ambiguity in player passports could not be held against the Respondent.
19.
In view of this, the DRC judge referred to art. 2 par. 1 of Annex 5 of the Regulations,
according to which the due amount of solidarity contribution had to be paid within 30
days after the registration of the player with the Respondent. Therefore and taking into
account that the player was registered with the Respondent on 13 July 2005, interests
on the amount claimed by the Claimant were due as from 13 August 2005, despite the
specific circumstances of the non-payment of solidarity contribution by the Respondent.
20.
In view of the above, the DRC judge reiterated that the claim of the Claimant is partially
accepted and that the Respondent has to pay the amount of EUR 140,000, plus 5%
interest p.a. as of 13 August 2005 until the date of effective payment.
21.
The DRC judge concluded its deliberations by stating that all further claims of the
Claimant are rejected.
III.
Decision of the DRC judge
1.
The claim of the Claimant, Club L, is admissible.
2.
The claim of the Claimant, Club L, is partially accepted.
3.
The Respondent, Club O, has to pay to the Claimant, within 30 days as from the
date of notification of this decision, the amount of EUR 140,000, plus 5% interest
p.a. as of 13 August 2005 until the date of effective payment.
4.
If the aforementioned sum plus interest is not paid within the stated time limit, the
present matter shall be submitted, upon request, to the FIFA Disciplinary Committee
for consideration and a formal decision.
5.
Any further claims lodged by the Claimant, Club L, are rejected.
Solidarity contribution in connection with the player J
(Club L, from country N / Club O, from country F)
5/6
6.
The Claimant is directed to inform the Respondent immediately and directly of the
account number to which the remittance 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:
Jérôme Valcke
Secretary General
Enclosed: CAS directives
Solidarity contribution in connection with the player J
(Club L, from country N / Club O, from country F)
6/6