Training Compensation
Texto da decisão
Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 28 July 2005,
in the following composition:
Slim Aloulou (Tunisia), chairman
Jean-Marie Philips (Belgium), member
Philippe Diallo (France), member
Gerardo Movilla (Spain), member
Philippe Piat (France), member
on the claim presented by
A
as Claimant
against
B
as Respondent
regarding the training compensation related to the transfer of the federative rights
of the player C
I.
Facts of the case
1.
The player C, born on 29 February 1984, was registered for A from 14
September 1999 until 30 June 2004, between the ages of 15 and 20.
2.
At the beginning of the 2004/2005 sporting season, the player was registered
with B.
3.
A is presently claiming from B the payment of training compensation for the
player in question, in accordance with Chapter VII of the FIFA Regulations for
the Status and Transfer of Players (edition September 2001).
4.
On 12 May 2004, A offered a new contract to the player with a salary
increase, which was refused by the latter.
5.
With regard to both clubs’ categorisation, A belongs to category 2 and B to
category 1. The indicative amount per year for category 1 and 2 in Europe are
respectively EUR 90,000 and EUR 60,000.
6.
In light of the above, A is presently claiming the payment of EUR 375,000
from B, which corresponds to the average of both clubs’ categories for the
period of five (5) sporting seasons, as established in the aforementioned
regulations.
7.
On the other hand, B asserts that the amounts claimed by A are too high, in
particular, comparing with the effective costs incurred with the player’s
training and education. In this regard, B maintains that A has failed to
provide it and the FIFA Administration with clear evidence proving that it has
effectively spent the amounts claimed, for the player’s training and
education.
8.
Moreover, B asserts that for the sporting season in which the player was 15
years old, category 4 should apply, as stipulated in Art. 7 par. 2 of the
aforementioned Regulations.
9.
Furthermore, B underlines the fact that the player in question was already
registered as a non-amateur with A and therefore, A also benefited from his
services.
10.
Finally, B asserts that, the compensation list established in accordance with
the Regulations of A’s country, stipulated that A would be entitled to receive
only the amount of EUR 100,000, as compensation for the training and
education of the player in question. In this regard, A asserted that the
aforementioned amount is stipulated in accordance with the Regulations of
its country for purposes of training compensation, concerning internal
transfers only.
2
II.
Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The Dispute Resolution Chamber of the FIFA Players’ Status Committee shall
review disputes coming under its jurisdiction pursuant to Art. 42 of the FIFA
Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players (edition September 2001)
at the request of one of the parties to the dispute.
2.
In accordance with Art. 42.1 lit. (b) (iv) of the FIFA Regulations for the Status
and Transfer of Players (edition September 2001), it falls within the purview
of the Dispute Resolution Chamber to review disputes concerning training
compensation fees.
3.
Consequently, the Dispute Resolution Chamber is the competent body to
decide on the present litigation concerning the training compensation fee
claimed by A.
4.
Entering into the substance of the matter, the Chamber acknowledged that
the player C was registered with A from 14 September 1999 until 30 June
2004, i.e. from the 1999/2000 sporting season until the 2003/2004 sporting
season, between the ages of 15 and 20, and that the present claim for
compensation was put forward by the Claimant before the player turned 23
years of age.
5.
Continuing, the Chamber stated that, as established in Circular letter no. 826,
dated 31 October 2002, training compensation is payable for training
incurred between the ages of 12 and 21, if the player concludes a
non-amateur contract before the age of 23.
6.
In light of the above, and particularly taking into consideration the
aforementioned period of stay with the Claimant, the Chamber considered
that the player’s positive development has to be mostly attributed to the
training and education that he received from A.
7.
Moreover, the Chamber acknowledged that, in accordance with Art. 5, § 5 of
the Regulations governing the Application of the Regulations for the Status
and Transfer of Players, A has offered C a new employment contract, valid for
the sporting season 2004/2005, with better financial conditions than the ones
stipulated in their previous contract.
8.
As a consequence, the Chamber reached the conclusion that, A is indisputably
entitled to receive from B, compensation for the training and education of C
regarding the timeframe that the latter spent with it.
9.
According to Art. 5.1 of the Regulations governing the Regulations for the
Status and Transfer of Players, for purposes of calculating compensation, the
3
relevant training period starts at the beginning of the season and ends at the
end of the season concerned.
10.
In the present matter, the Chamber outlined that the relevant training period
to take into consideration in the present matter went from the beginning of
the sporting season 1999/2000, when the player was 15, until the end
sporting season 2003/2004, when the player was 20.
11.
In accordance with the principles for calculation of the training compensation
amounts, stipulated in the FIFA Regulations for the Status and Transfer of
Players (edition September 2001) and particularly, in Art. 7.4 a) of the
Regulations governing the Application of the Regulations for the Status and
Transfer of Players, as well as in the aforementioned Circular letter, training
compensation between clubs belonging to the EU/EEA area, when a player
moves from a lower to a higher category, calculation is the average of the
training costs of both clubs’ categories per each sporting season.
12.
In this context, the Chamber took note that A belonged to Category 2 in
Europe during the relevant sporting seasons, i.e. from 1999/2000 until
2003/2004, to which corresponds an indicative amount per year of
EUR 60,000.
13.
The Chamber also noted that B belonged to category 1 in Europe during the
aforementioned sporting seasons, to which corresponds an indicative amount
per year of EUR 90,000.
14.
On the other hand, and just for the sake of good order, the Chamber
emphasized that, in order to calculate the training compensation due for the
sporting season 1999/2000, which the player started with the age of 15, it
applies the category of A at the time, instead of category 4, as claimed by B,
since the aforementioned sporting season was the season of the player’s 16th
birthday.
15.
Furthermore, with regard to the argument raised by B concerning the
amounts established in a compensation list drafted according to the
Regulations in A’s country, the Chamber outlined that in matters of
international transfers, such as the case at hand, the amounts that are to be
taken into account in order to calculate training compensation, are only the
ones established in Circular letter no. 826.
16.
Finally, the members of the Chamber also clarified that the Claimant does not
carry the burden of proof with regard to the expenses incurred in the
training and education of a specific player, since the category amounts
established in the aforementioned Circular letter are standard ones, which
are generally applicable to all players, unless the contrary is proven. In fact, it
4
would have been the burden of B to prove that the amount claimed was
disproportionate, but it clearly failed to do so.
17.
In light of all the above, the Chamber calculated the training compensation
amounts based on the indicative amounts listed in the aforementioned
Circular letter and decided that B must pay to A, the amount of EUR 75,000
per each of the five (5) sporting seasons that C remained with A, from the
age of 15 until the age of 20.
18.
In conclusion, the Dispute Resolution Chamber decided that B is liable to pay
the amount of EUR 375,000 to A, for the training compensation of C.
III.
Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of A is accepted.
2.
The Respondent B has to pay the amount of EUR 375,000 to the Claimant A.
3.
The amount due to A has to be paid by B within 30 days as from the date of
notification of the present decision.
4.
If the Respondent fails to comply with the above-mentioned deadline, an
interest rate of 5% per year will apply and the case will immediately be
presented to the FIFA Disciplinary Committee.
5.
The Claimant is directed to inform the Respondent immediately of the
account number to which the remittance is to be made and to notify the
Dispute Resolution Chamber of every payment received.
6.
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 Beaumont 2
1012 Lausanne
Tel: +41 21 613 50 00
Fax: +41 21 613 50 01
5
e-mail: [email protected]
www.tas-cas.org
For the Dispute Resolution Chamber:
Urs Linsi
General Secretary
Enclosed: CAS directives
6