Solidarity Contribution
Texto da decisão
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) judge
passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 13 December 2013,
by Theo van Seggelen (Netherlands), DRC judge,
on the claim presented by the club,
Club M, from country P
as Claimant
against the club,
Club D, from country U
as Respondent
regarding solidarity contribution in connection with
the transfer of the player N
I.
Facts of the case
1.
According to the official confirmation of the Football Federation of country P, the
player, N (hereinafter: the player), born on 15 January 1983, was registered with
the Club M, from country P (hereinafter: Claimant), as from 9 September 2005
until 3 February 2006.
2.
The football season in country P ran as from 1 July until 30 June of the following
year.
3.
The Football Federation of country U informed FIFA that the player was
registered with its affiliated club, Club D (hereinafter: Respondent), on 16
February 2011.
4.
According to the Claimant, in January 2011, the Club X, from country P
(hereinafter: the involved club), concluded a transfer agreement with the
Respondent for the transfer of the player.
5.
According to the information contained in the Transfer Matching System (TMS),
the involved club and the Respondent agreed upon a transfer compensation
amounting to EUR 1,230,000 payable until 10 February 2011.
6.
On 20 September 2012, the Claimant contacted FIFA claiming its proportion of the
solidarity contribution in connection with the transfer of the player concerned
from the involved club to the Respondent for the alleged transfer compensation
of EUR 1,230,000. In particular, the Claimant requested 4,04% of 5% of the said
transfer compensation, equivalent to EUR 2,484.60, plus 5% interest as from 18
March 2011.
7.
On 15 July 2013, the Respondent stated that under the terms of the transfer
agreement between it and the involved club, the latter is obliged to pay solidarity
contribution. In this respect, it provided FIFA with a copy of the transfer
agreement.
II.
Considerations of the DRC judge
1.
First of all, the Dispute Resolution Chamber judge (hereinafter: the DRC judge)
analysed whether he was competent to deal with the case at hand. In this
respect, the DRC judge first referred to art. 21 par. 1 and 3 of the Rules
Governing the Procedures of the Players' Status Committee and the Dispute
Resolution Chamber (edition 2012). The present matter was submitted to FIFA on
20 September 2012, thus before the aforementioned Rules entered into force on
1 December 2012. Therefore, the DRC judge concluded that the 2008 edition of
the Rules Governing the Procedures of the Players' Status Committee and the
Solidarity contribution for the player N
(Club M, from country P / Club D, from country U) 2
Dispute Resolution Chamber (hereinafter: the Procedural Rules) is applicable to
the matter at hand.
2.
Subsequently, the DRC judge referred to art. 3 par. 2 of the Procedural Rules,
which states that the jurisdiction of the DRC judge is set out in art. 24 par. 2 of
the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2012). In
accordance with art. 22 lit. d) and art. 24 par. 2 iii) of the aforementioned
Regulations, the DRC judge concluded that he was competent to deal with a
dispute regarding solidarity contribution involving a club affiliated to the
Football Federation of country P and a club affiliated to the Football Federation
of country U.
3.
Furthermore, the DRC 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, the DRC judge referred, on the one hand, to art. 26 par. 1
and 2 in connection with art. 29 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of
Players (editions 2012 and 2010) and, on the other hand, to the fact that the
present claim was lodged on 20 September 2012 and that the player was
registered for the Respondent on 16 February 2011. In view of the
aforementioned, the DRC judge concluded that the 2010 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 DRC judge and the applicable regulations having been
established, he entered into the substance of the matter. In doing so, the DRC
judge started by acknowledging the above-mentioned facts of the case as well as
the documents contained in the file.
5.
In this respect, the DRC judge noted that the Claimant requested the payment of
the amount of EUR 2,484 as solidarity contribution from the Respondent,
corresponding to 4,04% of the 5% of the total compensation, plus 5% interest as
from 18 March 2011.
6.
In addition to the above, the DRC judge took into account that according to the
information contained in the Transfer Matching System (TMS), the involved club
and the Respondent agreed upon a transfer compensation of EUR 1,230,000
payable until 10 February 2011.
7.
Furthermore, the DRC judge duly noted that the Respondent assessed that,
according to the terms of the transfer agreement, the involved club is obliged to
pay solidarity contribution.
8.
Having established the above, the DRC judge referred to art. 21 of the
Regulations in combination with art. 1 of Annexe 5 of the Regulations, which
Solidarity contribution for the player N
(Club M, from country P / Club D, from country U) 3
stipulate that, if a professional moves during the course of a contract, 5% of any
compensation, not including training compensation paid to his former club, shall
be deducted from the total amount of this compensation and be distributed by
the new club as a solidarity contribution to the club(s) involved in the training
and education of the player in proportion of the number of years the player has
been registered with the relevant club(s) between the seasons of his 12th and 23rd
birthday.
9.
In this respect, the DRC judge recalled that the Football Federation of country P
had confirmed that the player, born on 15 January 1983, was registered with the
Claimant as from 9 September 2005 until 3 February 2006.
10.
On account of the above and in accordance with art. 1 of Annexe 5 of the
Regulations, the DRC judge considered that the Claimant is, thus, entitled to
receive solidarity contribution for the period as from 9 September 2005 until 6
February 2006.
11.
As to the obligation to pay solidarity contribution, the DRC judge was eager to
emphasize that, pursuant to art. 2 par. 2 of Annexe 5 of the Regulations, it is the
responsibility of the new club to calculate and distribute the solidarity
contribution. Equally, the DRC judge stressed that the solidarity mechanism is a
principle well-established in the Regulations, from which the parties signing a
transfer contract cannot derogate through the contents of a contract. In other
words, the obligation to distribute solidarity contribution cannot be set aside by
means of a contract concluded between the clubs involved in a player’s transfer;
the Regulations clearly establish that the distribution of the solidarity
contribution is incumbent on the new club. As a result, he readily accepted that
the Respondent is liable for the payment of solidarity contribution.
12.
Having established that the Respondent is obliged to pay solidarity contribution
to the Claimant, the DRC judge then turned to the calculation of the pertinent
amount. In this respect, the DRC judge took in consideration that the player was
born on 15 January 1983.
13.
As a result, the DRC judge decided that, in accordance with art. 1 of Annexe 5 of
the Regulations as well as in accordance with the percentage claimed by the
Claimant, the Respondent is liable to pay 4.04% of the 5% of the relevant
transfer compensation, i.e. EUR 2,484. In addition, and in accordance with the
Claimant’s request, the DRC judge concluded that a 5% interest rate p.a. on said
amount as of 19 March 2011 should apply. Consequently, the DRC judge partially
accepted the claim of the Claimant and determined that the Respondent has to
pay to the Claimant the amount of EUR 2,484 plus 5% interest p.a. on said
amount as of 19 March 2011.
Solidarity contribution for the player N
(Club M, from country P / Club D, from country U) 4
14.
Finally, 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 the proceedings
before the Dispute Resolution Chamber relating to disputes regarding training
compensation and the solidarity mechanism costs in the maximum amount of
CHF 25,000 are levied. The costs are to be borne in consideration of the parties’
degree of success in the proceedings.
15.
In this respect, the DRC judge reiterated that the Claimant is the successful party
of the present proceedings and decided that therefore the Respondent has to
bear the full costs of the current proceedings in front of FIFA.
16.
According to Annexe A of the Procedural Rules, the costs of the proceedings are
to be levied on the basis of the amount in dispute.
17.
The amount in dispute to be taken into consideration in the present proceedings
amounts to EUR 2,484.60 related to the claim of the Claimant. Therefore, the DRC
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).
18.
Considering that the case at hand did not compose any complex factual or legal
issues, that it was adjudicated by the DRC judge and not by the DRC, the DRC
judge determined the final amount of costs of the current proceedings to the
amount of CHF 1,000, which shall be borne by the Respondent.
*****
III.
Decision of the DRC judge
1.
2.
The claim of the Claimant, Club M, is partially accepted.
The Respondent, Club D, has to pay to the Claimant, Club M, within 30 days as
of the date of notification of the present decision, the amount of EUR 2,484 plus
5% interest p.a. on said amount as of 19 March 2011 until the date of effective
payment.
3.
If 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.
Any further claim lodged by the Claimant, Club M, is rejected.
5.
The final costs of the proceedings in the amount of CHF 1,000 are to be paid by
the Respondent, Club D, within 30 days of notification of the present decision
to FIFA to the following bank account with reference to case nr.:
Solidarity contribution for the player N
(Club M, from country P / Club D, from country U) 5
UBS Zurich
Account number 366.677.01U (FIFA Players’ Status)
Clearing number 230
IBAN: CH27 0023 0230 3666 7701U
SWIFT: UBSWCHZH80A
6.
The Claimant, Club M, is directed to inform the Respondent, Club D, 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
Encl. CAS directives
Solidarity contribution for the player N
(Club M, from country P / Club D, from country U) 6