Solidarity Contribution
Texto da decisão
Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 22 June 2007,
in the following composition:
Slim Aloulou (Tunisia), President
Essa M. Saleh Al-Housani (Uniated Arab Emirates), member
Philippe Diallo (France), member
Joaquim Evangelista (Portugal), member
Philippe Piat (France), member
on the claim presented by the club
X, xxxxx
represented by Mr xxxxxx, attorney at law,
as Claimant
against the club
Y, xxxxx
as Respondent
regarding the solidarity contribution related to
the transfer of the player Z.
I.
Facts of the case:
1.
The xxxxx confirmed that the player Z, born on 12 April 1980, was registered with
X, the Claimant, from 1 September 1995 until 21 March 1999, between the ages of
15 and 18.
2.
On 31 July 2006, the Claimant, contacted FIFA claiming its portion of the solidarity
contribution amounting to 35.82% of the transfer compensation paid by Y, the
Respondent, to the club A.
3.
The Claimant affirms that the player was transferred from A to the Respondent,
on 16 August 2004.
4.
On 9 October 2006, the Respondent informed FIFA that it paid no transfer
compensation to any club at all for the services of the player since the said player
was not contractually bound to any club by the time he signed an employment
contract with it. To this regard, the Respondent provided a copy of a
“disvinculation letter” issued by the club A (the player’s former club) dated 30
June 2004, by means of which the aforementioned club informed the regional
association that the employment contract with the player Z had been resigned on
30 June 2004 and that the player is able to sign an employment contract with any
club of his choice.
5.
The Respondent, also, stressed that art. 21 of the FIFA Regulations for the Status
and Transfer of Players stipulates that solidarity contribution is payable if a
professional is transferred before the expiry of his contract. However, in the
present case the player was not contractually bound to any club by the time he
was transferred.
6.
Upon FIFA’s request the club A (the player’s former club) confirmed that the
employment relationship it had with the player in question was prematurely
terminated, upon the player’s request, and therefore it never negotiated any
transfer compensation at all with the player’s new club, i.e. the Respondent.
7.
The Claimant club requests a formal decision.
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
2
Resolution Chamber. The present matter was submitted to FIFA on 31 July 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 on the matter at hand.
2.
With regard to the competence of the Chamber, art. 3 par. 1 of the abovementioned Rules states that the Dispute Resolution Chamber shall examine its
jurisdiction in the light of articles 22 to 24 of the current version of the
Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2005). In accordance
with art. 24 par. 1 in connection 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 solidarity
mechanism.
3.
As a consequence, the Dispute Resolution Chamber is the competent body to
decide on the present litigation concerning the distribution of the solidarity
contribution claimed by the Claimant in connection with the transfer of the
professional Z.
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 the
modified version 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 August 2004. Equally the Chamber took note that the claim was
lodged at FIFA on 31 July 2006. In view of the aforementioned, the Chamber
concluded that the former FIFA Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players
(edition 2001, hereafter: the Regulations) are applicable on the case at hand as to
the substance.
5.
In continuation, the members of the Chamber emphasized that in accordance with
art. 25 of the Regulations as well as art 10. et. seqq. of the Regulations governing
the Application of the Regulations, as a general rule, if a non-amateur player
moves during the course of a contract, a proportion of 5% of any compensation
paid to the former club will be redistributed as a solidarity contribution to the
clubs involved in the training and education of the player concerned over the
years.
6.
In light of the above, the Chamber continued its deliberation by stating that the
provisions of the solidarity contribution apply only in the event of a player
transferring between two clubs affiliated to different associations and if a transfer
3
compensation is paid by the player’s new club to the player’s former club, from
where the player is being transferred during the course of a contract.
7.
As a result, the Chamber stressed that, firstly, it needed to address the question
whether the player was effectively transferred during the course of an
employment contract with his former club, i.e. club A, and if a transfer
compensation had been paid by the player’s new club, i.e. the Respondent, to the
player’s former club, i.e. the club A.
8.
In continuation, the Chamber took due note that, on the one hand, the
Respondent as well as the player’s former club explained that since the
employment relationship between the player and his former club had been
prematurely terminated in June 2004 no transfer compensation was ever paid for
the player’s transfer in August 2004. On the other, hand, the Chamber
acknowledged that the Claimant requests a formal decision.
9.
In view of the above, the Chamber referred to the above considerations contained
under points II. 5.-7., and took into account that, on the one hand, the
Respondent provided a copy of a “disvinculation letter”, by means of which it can
be established that the Respondent and the player prematurely terminated their
employment relationship on 30 June 2004. On the other hand, the Chamber also
considered that the player’s transfer was in August 2004 and that both clubs
concerned, the player’s new club as well as his former club confirmed that no
transfer compensation was paid at all.
10.
As a result, the members of the Chamber unanimously concluded that based on
the documents at their disposal it can be established that neither was the player
transferred during the course of an employment contract nor was any transfer
compensation paid from his new club to his former club.
11.
For all the reasons above, the Dispute Resolution Chamber rejected the Claimant’s
request.
III.
Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim lodged by the Claimant is rejected.
2.
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
4
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 Dispute Resolution Chamber:
Jérôme Valcke
General Secretary
Encl.
CAS directives
5