Solidarity Contribution
Texto da decisão
Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 4 February 2005,
in the following composition:
Slim Aloulou (Tunisia), Chairman
Michele Colucci (Italy), member
Philippe Piat (France), member
Maurice Watkins (England), member
Mario Gallavotti (Italy), member
on the claim presented by
Club F.
as Claimant
against
Club M.
as Respondent
regarding the solidarity contribution related to the transfer of the federative rights to the
player B.
./…
Facts of the case
-
In August 2002 the clubs A. and M., both affiliated to the same association, agreed on
the transfer of the federative rights to the player B.
-
The player B., born on 5 September 1975, was registered for the club F. for a total of
five seasons, respectively from July 1991 to June 1994, thus between the ages of 16 and
19, and from July 1995 to June 1997, thus between the ages of 20 and 22.
-
The club F. claims the 5% payment established in article 25 of the FIFA Regulations for
the Status and Transfer of Players regarding the contribution to the solidarity
mechanism related to the transfer of the federative rights to the player B. from A. to
M.
-
According to the aforementioned Regulations, the new club concerned is to distribute
5% of this compensatory amount to the club(s) where the player has played between
the ages of 12 and 23, in the present case thus between 1987 and 1998.
-
The club F. asks the Dispute Resolution Chamber to sentence the club M. to start with
the distribution of the solidarity contribution of 5% related to the transfer of the
federative rights to the player B., plus 7%, or any other rate determined by the Dispute
Resolution Chamber, default interest and to take all the disciplinary measures that the
Chamber may deem appropriate against the aforementioned club.
-
The club M. states that it acted in accordance with the applicable regulations and that
it understood that no solidarity payments were due in case of transfers between clubs
of the same association. Therefore, all transfer monies were paid to A. and no
reference was made in the transfer agreement to the solidarity mechanism.
Consequently, the club M. is of the opinion that the club F. is not entitled to any
solidarity contribution from M.
Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
The Dispute Resolution Chamber commenced its deliberations by referring to art. 25 of the
FIFA Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players (hereinafter: the Regulations),
according to which it falls within the purview of the Dispute Resolution Chamber to review
disputes concerning the distribution of the solidarity contribution. Consequently, the
Chamber established that it was competent to deal with the present litigation.
Subsequently, and entering into the substance of the matter, the Chamber acknowledged
that, for the case at hand, it was essential to establish whether an internal transfer, this
means a move of a player from one club to another, both affiliated to the same
association, could be the basis for a claim for solidarity contribution or not. In this respect,
the Dispute Resolution Chamber referred to its own recent jurisprudence and recalled that
this matter of principle had already been addressed in previous occasions.
In line with its jurisprudence, the deciding body referred to the contents of the
Regulations and in particular, to their Preamble. Par. 1 of the Preamble establishes that the
Regulations deal with the status and eligibility of players, as well as with the rules
applicable whenever players move between clubs belonging to different associations. The
Chamber lent emphasis to the wording of the last part of the aforementioned clause and
concluded that, in fact, the Regulations are not applicable to transfers of the federative
rights to a player between two clubs affiliated to the same association. Consequently, the
Solidarity Contribution for the player B.
(Club F. / Club M.)
Page 2 of 3
members of the Chamber were of the unanimous opinion that the relevant jurisprudence
can be confirmed and concluded that the principle regarding the solidarity mechanism
contained in the Regulations is not applicable to national transfers, not even in cases
where the club claiming the payment of the relevant contribution is affiliated to another
association.
Equally, the Chamber reiterated that the principle of the solidarity mechanism is not
included in par. 2 of the Preamble of the Regulations and therefore, it is not binding at
national level.
On account of all the above, the Dispute Resolution Chamber decided that the claim of the
club F. against the club M. for payment of solidarity contribution has to be rejected.
Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the club F. is rejected.
2.
According to art. 60 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 10 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 l’Elysée 28
1006 Lausanne
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:
Urs Linsi
General Secretary
Encl.
Solidarity Contribution for the player B.
(Club F. / Club M.)
Page 3 of 3