Training Compensation
Texto da decisão
Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 8 June 2007,
in the following composition:
Slim Aloulou (Tunisia), Chairman
Philippe Diallo (France), member
Percival Majavu (South Africa), member
Theo van Seggelen (Netherlands), member
John Didulica (Australia), member
on the claim presented by
the club, X, A,
as Claimant
against
the club, Y, B,
as Respondent
regarding a training compensation dispute related
to the transfer of the player Q
I.
Facts of the case
1.
The player Q was born on 4 March 1987 and was registered with X from 7
September 2005 until 23 January 2006.
2.
In January 2006, the player signed a trainee contract with X valid until 30 June
2007.
3.
In accordance with the written confirmation of the Football Federation of B, the
club Y is classified as a category 1 club.
4.
On 3 April 2006, X lodged a claim against Y in front of FIFA to claim training
compensation for the player on the basis of article 20 and annex 4 of the
Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players.
5.
On 18 April 2006, Y informed FIFA that no training compensation was due by
virtue of a document signed by X on 23 January 2006, which Y had received from
the Football Federation of A upon the relevant player’s arrival. In paragraph 8 a)
of said document, X had entered the answer “no” under the heading “The club
seeks compensation”. Y considers this statement to exempt it from training
compensation.
6.
X claims that it never waived its right to training compensation and that the
document mentioned by Y is for internal use by the Football Federation of A and
can therefore not be invoked by Y.
7.
The disputed document consists of a form. Paragraph 8 reads as follows:
“8- Status as regards sums invested in the player’s development:
a)
The club seeks compensation: no
b)
The compensation has already been paid to the club: no
c)
Has the compensation agreement with the new club been concluded: no
d)
The player spent five months at the club from 30 August 2005 to 23
January 2006
e)
Did the player stay at the club where he was first registered for at least 12
months: no”
8.
Following an inquiry by the FIFA administration as to the nature of the disputed
document, the Football Federation of A explained that it is a document entitled
“allowance” which was filled out by X. This document is required by the Football
Federation of A in connection with all player transfers and for the issuance of
the ITC, which in principle cannot take place until the club’s “allowance” has
been submitted and other formalities have been completed. Consequently,
Training Compensation for the player Q
2
according to the Football Federation of A, the purpose of the relevant document
is to enable a player to change his club.
II.
Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
First of all, the Dispute Resolution Chamber analysed whether it was competent
to deal with the matter at hand. In this respect, the Chamber referred to art. 18
paras. 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 3 April 2006, thus after 1 July 2005. Therefore, the Dispute
Resolution Chamber concluded that the revised Rules Governing the 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 Dispute Resolution Chamber, art. 3 para. 1
of the above-mentioned Rules states that the Dispute Resolution Chamber shall
examine its jurisdiction in the light of arts. 22 to 24 of the current version of the
Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2005). In accordance
with art. 24 para. 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 X for the training and education of the player Q.
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 paras. 1
and 2 of the Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2005) in
the modified version in accordance with the FIFA circular no. 995 dated 23
September 2005. Furthermore, it acknowledged that the player had been
registered with Y in January 2006. Equally the Chamber took note that the claim
was lodged at FIFA on 3 April 2006. In view of the aforementioned, the Chamber
concluded that the current edition of the FIFA Regulations for the Status and
Transfer of Players (edition 2005, hereinafter: the Regulations) is applicable to
the case at hand as to the substance.
5.
Entering into the substance of the matter, the Dispute Resolution Chamber first
of all recalled that, pursuant to art. 20 of the Regulations and art. 1 para. 1 of
Annex 4 of the Regulations, Training Compensation shall in general be paid to a
Training Compensation for the player Q
3
player’s training club(s) when the player signs his first contract as a Professional
and on each transfer of a Professional until the end of the Season of his 23rd
birthday for training incurred up to the age of 21.
6.
In this respect, upon analysis of the facts to the present dispute, the Dispute
Resolution Chamber ascertained that X had trained and educated the player, Q,
during the season of his 19th birthday as from 7 September 2005 until 23 June
2006 and that he had subsequently, thus before his 23rd birthday, signed a
trainee contract with the club Y.
7.
On account of the above, the Dispute Resolution Chamber stated that the
conditions for the payment of training compensation were in principle fulfilled.
However, at this point the members of the Chamber turned their attention to
the statement of defence of the club Y, which had argued that no training
compensation was due in the present case on the basis of the document entitled
“allowance” which had been filled out by X.
8.
Accordingly, the members of the Chamber proceeded to the examination of the
said document and to deliberate on the question whether X had indeed waived
its right to compensation for the training and education of the player QiC on the
basis of the said document.
9.
In this regard, the members of the Dispute Resolution Chamber first of all
assured themselves that under the point 8 a) of the said document, stating “The
club seeks compensation”, X had answered in the negative.
10.
In view of this fact, the panel proceeded to discuss the nature of the document
and whether the so-called “allowance” could in fact be invoked by Y. In this
respect, the members of the Chamber acknowledged that, without prejudice to
the rights of any other club that contributed to the player’s training in the event
of the registration of the player as a professional for the first time, two clubs
could indeed agree upon not to apply the provisions governing training
compensation in a specific case. However, training compensation being a right
stipulated in the Regulations, the members of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
were of the unanimous opinion that the existence of a waiver of this right could
only be assumed in case it was unmistakable that the renouncing club had
indeed intended to waive its right to training compensation under the applicable
Regulations.
11.
In the matter at hand, the Dispute Resolution Chamber deemed that it had no
alternative but to doubt that X had in fact intended to renounce its right to
payment of training compensation from Y. In this respect, the panel emphasised
that the document did not constitute an agreement between the Claimant and
Training Compensation for the player Q
4
the Respondent, but had primarily been issued in accordance with the
administrative procedure of the Football Federation of A relating to the transfer
of a player in order to enable the player Q to move from X and continue his
career with another club. Furthermore, the members of the Chamber deemed
that the document’s paragraph 8 a) concerning the compensation for the player
was drafted in very general terms - no mention being made with regard to the
player’s transfer to Y or the applicable provisions of the FIFA Regulations
regarding training compensation - and could therefore not be understood as a
waiver in favour of the Respondent with regard to this specific case. The
members of the Chamber were also eager to emphasize that the so-called
“allowance” appeared to be a document for internal use only and was in any
case not apt to call a right stipulated in the Regulations into question.
12.
The foregoing led the members of the Dispute Resolution Chamber to conclude
that, in the present case, Y was liable to pay training compensation to X in
accordance with art. 20 of the Regulations and art. 1 para. 1 of Annex 4 of the
Regulations.
13.
With regard to the amount due to X, the Dispute Resolution Chamber referred
to art. 5 para. 1 of Annex 4 to the Regulations, according to which, as a general
rule, the calculation of training compensation is based on the costs that would
have been incurred by the new club if it had trained the player itself. According
to para. 2 of the said provision, the training costs of the new club must be
multiplied by the number of years of training of the player with the former
club(s).
14.
Consequently, the Dispute Resolution Chamber firstly ascertained that Y is a
category 1 club with an indicative amount of EUR 90,000 (cf. FIFA circular no. 959
dated 16 March 2005). The player Q had been trained by X during five months.
Therefore, the Dispute Resolution Chamber closed its deliberations on the
present case by deciding that Y was to pay the amount of EUR 37,500 to X.
III.
Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim lodged by the Claimant, the club X, is accepted.
2.
The Respondent, Y, shall pay the amount of EUR 37,500 to the Claimant, X,
within 30 days following the date of notification of the present decision.
Training Compensation for the player Q
5
3.
In the event that the above-mentioned amount is not paid within the indicated
deadline, interest at the rate of 5% per year will apply and the present matter
shall be submitted to FIFA’s Disciplinary Committee for its consideration and
decision.
4.
The Claimant, the club X, is instructed to inform the Respondent, the club Y,
directly and 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
On behalf of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber:
Jérôme Valcke
General Secretary
Encl.
CAS directives
Training Compensation for the player Q
6