Training Compensation
Texto da decisão
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 22 July 2010,
in the following composition:
Slim Aloulou (Tunisia), Chairman
Theo van Seggelen (Netherlands), member
Jon Newman (USA), member
Ivan E. Gazidis (England), member
Guillermo Saltos Guale (Ecuador), member
on the claim presented by the club
A,
as Claimant
against the club
S
as Respondent
regarding a training compensation dispute
related to the transfer of the player F
I.
Facts of the case
1.
According to the player passport issued by the Football Confederation B (FCB)
issued in November 2008, but rectified on 6 March 2009, the player F (hereinafter:
the player), born on 24 November 1985, was registered with the club, A
(hereinafter: the Claimant), as a professional player as from 11 August 2004 to 16
February 2005, then loaned to another club, S, as from 17 February to 30 June
2005, before being registered again with the Claimant as a professional player as
from 1 July 2005 to 19 April 2006.
2.
Equally, the Football Confederation B informed that the country B sporting season
follows the calendar year. Therefore, it starts in January and ends in December of
each year.
3.
According to a written confirmation of the Football Federation O (FFO), the player
was registered on 18 July 2007 for its affiliated club, S (hereinafter: the
Respondent), as a professional player.
4.
The Football Federation O also confirmed that according to the Football League
O, the Respondent belonged to the category III (indicative amount of EUR 30,000
per year within UEFA) during the season 2007/08. In this respect, the Football
League O indicated that the Respondent was a “Club with Status” in opposition to
the “Clubs with Academy Status”, which were classified as category II.
5.
On 17 July 2009, the Claimant filed a request before the Dispute Resolution
Chamber against the Respondent, asking for the payment of EUR 79,150, plus an
interest rate calculated since the date on which the payment should be made,
according to the Claimant, on 17 July 2007, by the Respondent as training
compensation for the player.
6.
The Claimant stated in this respect that the contract between it and the player
reached its final term, and that, for this reason, the player was free to sign a new
contract. Since no transfer fee has been paid by the Respondent, training
compensation must be paid by the Respondent to the Claimant. Finally, according
to the Circular Letter 959a, the Claimant alleged that the Respondent was
classified as a category II club within UEFA. As a consequence, as from the season
of the player’s 16th birthday to the season of the player’s 21st birthday, EUR 60,000
is payable per year.
7.
On 13 November 2009, the Respondent submitted its response rejecting the claim
of the Claimant since the player and the Claimant mutually terminated their
contract in April 2006, and the latter did not offer the player a new employment
2
contract. According to Annex 4 art. 6 par. 3 of the FIFA Regulations for the Status
and Transfer of Players, no training compensation is payable, if the former club
does not offer the player a contract.
8.
Furthermore, since the player had allegedly been already registered on 10 July
2007 at the Football League O for the Respondent and the request was only filed
on 17 July 2009 by the Claimant before FIFA, the Respondent stated that in
accordance with article 25 par. 5 of the Regulations, the matter is time-barred.
Therefore, the claim should be rejected.
*****
II.
Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
First of all, the Dispute Resolution Chamber analysed whether it was competent to
deal with the case at hand. In this respect, it took note that the present matter
was submitted to FIFA on 17 July 2009. Consequently, the Rules Governing the
Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber
(edition 2008; hereinafter: the Procedural Rules) are applicable to the matter at
hand (cf. art. 21 par. 2 and 3 of the Procedural Rules).
2.
Subsequently, the members of the Chamber referred to art. 3 par. 1 of the
Procedural Rules and confirmed that in accordance with art. 24 par. 1 and
art. 22 d) of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2009),
the Dispute Resolution Chamber is competent to decide on the present litigation
with an international dimension concerning the training compensation claimed by
the Claimant for the training and education of the player F.
3.
In continuation, and before being able to enter into the substance of the matter,
the Chamber needed to verify whether the competent FIFA body could deal with
this affair or not for formal reasons. In particular, with respect to the Respondent’s
objection that the claim is to be considered as time-barred.
4.
To this regard, the Chamber referred to art. 25 par. 5 of the Regulations on the
Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2009), which stipulate that the Dispute
Resolution Chamber shall not hear any case subject to these regulations if more
than two years have elapsed since the event giving rise to the dispute.
5.
Due to the aforementioned, the members of the Chamber had to define which
was “the event giving rise to the dispute” and stated that according to art. 3
par. 2 of Annexe 4 of the Regulations, “[…] the deadline for payment of training
3
compensation [was] 30 days following the registration of the professional with the
new association.”
6.
In view of all the above, the DRC came to the conclusion that the event giving rise
to the present dispute took place on 17 August 2007, reason for which the
Claimant’s claim for the payment of training compensation amounting to
EUR 79,150, has to be considered as not barred by the statute of limitations in
application of art. 25 par. 5 of the Regulations, since the present claim was lodged
on 19 July 2007, thus inside the time limit of two years, since the facts leading to
the dispute arose and the lodging of the present claim. As a result, the Chamber
rejected the Respondent’s objection.
7.
Subsequently, taking into consideration that the player was registered with his
new club on 18 July 2007, and considering that the present claim was lodged on
17 July 2009, the Chamber analysed which regulations should be applicable as to
the substance of the matter. In this respect, it confirmed that in accordance with
art. 26 par. 1 and 2 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players
(editions 2009 and 2008), the previous version of the Regulations for the Status
and Transfer of Players (edition 2005; hereinafter: the Regulations) is applicable to
the matter at hand as to the substance.
8.
The competence of the Chamber and the applicable regulations having been
established, the Chamber entered into the substance of the matter. The members
of the Chamber started by acknowledging the facts of the case as well as the
documentation contained in the file.
9.
In this respect, the Chamber took note of the fact that the player F, born on 24
November 1985, was registered with the Claimant as a professional from 11
August 2004 to 16 February 2005 and, later again, from 1 July 2005 to 19 April
2006.
10.
The Chamber duly noted that, on the one hand, the Claimant is requesting
training compensation for the training and education of the player concerned
from the Respondent in the amount of EUR 79,150 plus 5% default interest. On
the other hand, the Chamber took into account that the Respondent replied
arguing that the player and the Claimant had mutually terminated their contract
and that the Claimant did not offer a new contract after its termination.
11.
With regard to the Respondent’s argument, the Chamber considered that, first
and foremost, the obligation of a club having offered the player a contract when
claiming training compensation is a requirement only needed to be met within
the European Union (EU) or the European Economic Area (EEA; cf. art. 6 par. 3 of
Annex 4 to the Regulations). Since the training club, i.e. the Claimant, is not
4
located within the EU/EEA, the Chamber concluded that the aforementioned
provision does not apply in the case at hand and therefore rejected the
Respondent’s argument to that regard.
12.
With the latter established, the Dispute Resolution Chamber went on to analyse
whether the Claimant was entitled to receive training compensation from the
Respondent.
13.
In this respect, the Chamber stated that, as established in art. 1 par. 1 of Annex 4
in combination with art. 2 of Annex 4 of the Regulations, training compensation is
payable, as a general rule, for training incurred between the ages of 12 and 21
when the player concerned is registered for the first time as a professional, or
when a professional is transferred between two clubs of two different
associations, before the end of the season of his 23rd birthday.
14.
In view of the above, the Chamber concluded that based on the documents at
disposal it can be established that the professional player in question, born on
24 November 1985, was transferred to the Respondent on 17 July 2007, i.e. before
the end of the season of the player’s 23 birthday and thus irrespective whether
the player and the Respondent had terminated their employment contract in
April 2006, the Claimant is entitled to receive training compensation from the
Respondent.
15.
As a result, and considering art. 3 par. 1 of the Annex 4 of the Regulations, which
stipulates that the amount payable is calculated on a pro rata basis according to
the period of training that the player spent with each club, the Chamber
concluded that the effective period of time to be considered at the matter at
stake corresponds to 15 months, season 2004 the months of August until
December, season 2005 the months of January and February as well as the months
of July until December, and finally season 2006, the months of January until April.
16.
Turning its attention to the calculation of training compensation, the Chamber
referred to art. 5 par. 1 and 2 of the Annex 4 of the Regulations, which stipulates
that as a general rule, it is necessary to take the costs that would have been
incurred by the new club if it had trained the player itself and thus it is calculated
based on the training costs of the new club multiplied by the number of years of
training with the former club.
17.
In this respect, the Chamber took due note that according to the information at
disposal the Respondent belonged to the category III in the season 2007/08
(indicative amount within UEFA EUR 30,000 per year).
5
18.
Equally, the Chamber emphasised once again that according to art. 3 par. 2 of the
Annex 4 to the Regulations, the deadline for payment of training compensation is
30 days following the registration of the professional with the new association.
19.
In view of all of the above, the Chamber concluded that the Claimant is entitled to
receive training compensation from the Respondent in the amount of EUR 42,500
plus interest of 5% per annum as from 18 August 2007 until the effective date of
payment.
20.
The Dispute Resolution Chamber therefore decided that the claim of the Claimant
was partially accepted.
21.
In continuation, the deciding authority 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 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.
22.
In this respect, the Chamber reiterated that the claim of the Claimant is partially
accepted. Therefore, the Respondent has to bear the costs of the current
proceedings in front of FIFA.
23.
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.
24.
The amount in dispute to be taken into consideration in the present proceedings
amounts to EUR 79,500 related to the claim of the Claimant. Therefore, the
Chamber concluded that the maximum amount of costs of the proceedings
corresponds to CHF 15,000 (cf. table in Annexe A).
25.
Considering that the case at hand allowed to be dealt with following a reasonable
procedure, that the case was adjudicated by the Chamber, that the present case
did not show particular factual difficulty and that it did not involve specific legal
complexity, the Chamber determined the final amount of costs of the current
proceedings to the amount of CHF 4,000.
26.
In this respect, the Chamber took into account that the Claimant had paid the
advance of costs in the amount of CHF 3,000 in accordance with art. 17 of the
Procedural Rules.
6
27.
In view of all of the above, the Chamber concluded that the amount of CHF 4,000
has to be paid by the Respondent to cover the costs of the present proceedings.
Thereof the amount of CHF 1,000 has to be paid by the Respondent to FIFA and
the amount of CHF 3,000 to the Claimant.
*****
7
III.
Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant, A, is partially accepted.
2.
The Respondent, S, has to pay to the Claimant, A, the amount of EUR 42,500 plus
5% interest per annum as of 18 August 2007 until the date of the effective
payment, within 30 days as of notification of the present decision.
3.
Any further claims lodged by the Claimant, A, are rejected.
4.
If the aforementioned sum is not paid within the aforementioned deadline the
present matter shall be submitted, upon request, to FIFA’s Disciplinary Committee,
for consideration and a formal decision.
5.
The final amount of costs of the proceedings in the amount of CHF 4,000 are to be
paid by the Respondent, S, within 30 days of notification of the present decision
as follows:
5.1.
The amount of CHF 1,000 to FIFA to the following bank account with
reference to case no. [XX-XXXXX/xxx]:
UBS Zurich
Account number 366.677.01U (FIFA Players’ Status)
Clearing number 230
IBAN: CH27 0023 0230 3666 7701U
SWIFT: UBSWCHZH80A
5.2.
6.
The amount of CHF 3,000 to the Claimant, A.
The Claimant, A, is directed to inform the Respondent, S, immediately and directly
of the account number to which the remittance is to be made and to notify the
Dispute Resolution Chamber of every payment received.
*****
8
Note relating to the motivated decision (legal remedy):
According to art. 63 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 Dispute Resolution Chamber:
Jérôme Valcke
Secretary General
Encl.
CAS directives
9