Solidarity Contribution
Texto da decisão
Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 25 August 2006,
in the following composition:
Slim Aloulou (Tunisia), Chairman
Carlos Soto (Chile), member
Michele Colucci (Italy), member
Mario Gallavotti (Italy), member
Mohamed Mecherara (Algeria), member
on the claim presented by the
Club X,
represented by Mr. A
as “Claimant”
against the
Club Z,
represented by Mr. B
as “Respondent”
regarding the interest on late payment of the solidarity contribution in connection with
the transfer of the player Y
I.
Facts of the case
1.
The player Y, born on 4 September 1977, was registered with the Club X, the
Claimant, from 16 October 1991 to 22 September 2000, between the ages of 14
and 23.
2.
On 9 August 2004, a transfer contract was signed between the Club W and the
Club Z, the Respondent, concerning the transfer of the player Y from the Club W
to the Club Z. This transfer contract provided for a transfer compensation of EUR
245,000.
3.
The player in question was registered by the Federation with its affiliated club,
Club Z, on 25 August 2004.
4.
Due to the fact that the player had been registered with the Claimant from the
age of 14 to the age of 23, the Claimant asserted that it had a right to 90% of
5% of the relevant transfer compensation as solidarity contribution in
accordance with the FIFA Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players
(edition 2001), i.e. a sum of EUR 11,025.
5.
On 16 June 2005 the Claimant made a request to FIFA for the recovery of this
sum.
6.
On 5 August 2005, the Claimant informed FIFA that it had received the sum of
EUR 11,025 as solidarity contribution for the relevant transfer of the player in
question. However, the Claimant pressed its case with FIFA for the recovery of
the sum of EUR 500 corresponding to default interest of 5% per annum for the
delay in payment of the solidarity contribution, i.e. from 12 September 2004, the
date which according to the Claimant the said solidarity contribution should
have been paid by the Respondent, to 15 July 2005, the date on which the sum
of EUR 11,025 was actually paid. The Claimant also requested that the
Respondent club should be subject to disciplinary sanctions for its conduct in
ignoring the notices presented by the Claimant before the proceedings with FIFA
were initiated.
7.
In faxes dated 29 August and 9 November 2005 and 12 April 2006, FIFA
requested the Respondent club to state its position on the subject of the interest
on late payment claimed by the Club X.
2
8.
On 21 April 2006, the Respondent presented its position in relation to the
interest on late payment requested by the Claimant. In this regard, the
Respondent confirmed that it had made payment of a sum of EUR 11,025 to the
Claimant, after the remittance of a demand to it by FIFA on 12 July 2005.
9.
The Respondent asserted that the first letter sent directly to it by the Claimant
was dated 2 February 2005 and that it was unaware of the existence of the debt
in favour of the Claimant related to the solidarity mechanism before this date as
neither the player nor the former club (Club W) had informed the Respondent of
the existence of these financial obligations.
10.
The Respondent maintained that on 3 February 2005 it sent two faxes to the
Claimant requesting accreditation to show that the player in question had
actually been registered with the Claimant, and to indicate for what period, in
order to calculate the exact amount of solidarity contribution to pay to the
Club X.
11.
The Respondent confirmed that the Claimant replied to the above-mentioned
faxes on 8 February and 29 March 2005 but that it had to wait for a series of
other documents. Equally, the Respondent confirmed that finally, on 13 April
2005, after having checked the validity of all the documents sent to it by the
Claimant, it sent the latter a copy of the transfer contract it had signed with Club
W acknowledging that it owed the sum of EUR 11,025 and in this respect
requested the Claimant's bank account details. The Club Z stated that the
Claimant replied on 18 April 2005 to give its bank account details.
12.
The Club Z affirmed that from this time the Claimant's legal representative
regularly telephoned and spoke in an insulting manner. The Respondent
maintained that interest on late payment is, if at all, due from the day after 18
April 2005, the date on which the Claimant confirmed its bank account details,
until 14 July 2005, the date on which payment was made. It thus asserted that
the delay was less than three months. It further noted that seeking to impose
sanctions on the Respondent for these reasons in addition to interest on late
payment goes against the concept of fair play in the world of football.
3
13.
With regards to the interest on late payment of 5% per annum, the Respondent
finally stated that it has never denied its obligation to pay the solidarity
contribution in this case but rather that it had acted prudently because it wished
to examine duly-translated documentary evidence and obtain confirmation from
the player in question. The Respondent asserted that it is the Claimant's
impatience that has led to the situation under consideration. As for disciplinary
sanctions, the Respondent affirmed that the Dispute Resolution Chamber has not
imposed such sanctions in any of its decisions on the solidarity mechanism.
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
Resolution Chamber. The present matter was submitted to FIFA on 16 June 2005,
as a consequence the Chamber concluded that the previous Procedural Rules
(edition 2001) 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. 25 par. 2 of the FIFA
Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2001) establishes that,
it falls within the purview of the Dispute Resolution Chamber to review disputes
concerning the distribution of the solidarity contribution.
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, respectively the payment of default interest related to such
contribution, claimed by the Claimant in connection with the transfer of the
professional player Y during the course of a contract.
4
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 on 25 August 2004. Equally the Chamber took note
that the claim was lodged at FIFA on 16 June 2005. 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 and entering into the substance of the matter, the Dispute
Resolution Chamber carefully considered and analysed the arguments and all
documents presented by both the Claimant and the Respondent during the
investigation of this case.
6.
The Dispute Resolution Chamber takes note of the fact that the Claimant
confirmed that it has received the sum of EUR 11,025 from the Respondent as
solidarity contribution for the relevant transfer of the player Y and that the
claim at stake solely concerns the payment of a sum of EUR 500 by the
Respondent as interest on late payment of 5% per annum for the delay in
payment of the relevant solidarity contribution. This interest is calculated on the
amount paid as solidarity contribution for the period from 12 September 2004,
the date on which the Claimant states that the solidarity contribution should
have been paid by the Respondent, to 15 July 2005, the date on which the
amount of EUR 11,025 was actually paid.
7.
Furthermore, the Dispute Resolution Chamber takes note of the fact that the
Association of the Club X informed FIFA that the player Y was registered with
the Claimant from 16 October 1991 to 22 September 2000, between the ages of
14 and 23.
8.
Consequently, the Chamber concludes that the question at the centre of this
dispute is the determination of interest on late payment allegedly payable by the
Respondent to the Claimant.
5
9.
In order to determine the relevant interest on late payment, the Chamber
considers that it is firstly appropriate to establish the relevant amount actually
payable by the Respondent to the Claimant in respect of the solidarity
mechanism for the education and training of the player Y.
10.
Art. 25 of the Regulations states that if a non-amateur player is transferred
during the course of a contract, a proportion of 5% of any compensation paid to
the player's former club will be distributed to the club(s) involved in the training
and education of the player. This distribution will be made in proportion to the
number of years the player has been registered with the relevant clubs between
the ages of 12 and 23.
11.
The Chamber also referred to art. 10 of the Regulations governing the
Application of the Regulations which sets out the key for the distribution of the
solidarity contribution.
12.
On account of the above, the Dispute Resolution Chamber concluded that the
period to be taken into consideration in the present case is the one from the
1991/1992 football season until the 1999/2000 football season, in other words
the seasons between the season of the player’s 13-14 years and the one of the
player’s 21-22 years. That being the case, the Chamber established that, in
accordance with the distribution key mentioned in art. 10 of the Regulations
governing the Application of the Regulations, the Claimant had the right to
receive 85% of the 5% of the compensation paid in respect of the transfer of the
player Y from the Club W to the Club Z.
13.
The Chamber noted that, according to the relevant transfer contract which was
presented during the investigation of the present case, the player had been
transferred from the aforementioned Club W to the Club Z for the sum of EUR
245,000. Thus, the Chamber stated that the Respondent was actually due to
compensate the Claimant with 85% of 5% of the transfer compensation paid in
respect of the transfer of the player Y from the Club W to the Club Z, namely a
sum of EUR 10,412.50.
6
14.
Taking into account the above mentioned as well as the documents on file, the
Dispute Resolution Chamber noted that the Respondent club had paid the
Claimant the sum of EUR 11,025 in respect of the solidarity mechanism for the
player in question, whereas it was only obliged to pay the sum of EUR 10,412.50.
Consequently, the Chamber concluded that the Respondent had paid the
Claimant an additional sum of EUR 612.50 that was not actually due.
15.
Subsequently and in view of the actual claim at the basis of the present matter,
the Dispute Resolution Chamber considered it appropriate to determine the
relevant sum that would be due as interest on late payment for the delay in the
payment of the solidarity contribution indeed due.
16.
In this respect, the Chamber started by establishing that interest on late payment
corresponding to 5% per annum should actually be paid in the case in question.
To that regard, the members of the Chamber stressed that the commencement
date for the calculation of interest on late payment should be 25 September
2004, the due date for the payment of the solidarity contribution, namely 31
days after the registration of the player by the Federation for its affiliated club,
Club Z on 25 August 2004 according to the confirmation sent by the said
Federation. The Chamber reached this conclusion by applying art. 11 par. 1 of
the Regulations governing the Application of the Regulations which states: "The
new club shall pay the amount due as a solidarity contribution to the training
clubs pursuant to the above provisions at the latest within 30 days of the player’s
registration".
17.
On account of the above, the Chamber established that the interest on late
payment should be considered for the period from 25 September 2004 to 15 July
2005, the date of payment of the sum of EUR 11,025 by the Club Z to the
Claimant. As a result, the Chamber determined the interest on late payment due
for this period to be EUR 413.65 taking into account a solidarity contribution of
EUR 10,412.50.
18.
Taking into account all of the above considerations, the members of the
Chamber concluded that the total amount due to the Claimant in respect of the
relevant solidarity contribution, including interest on late payment, amounts to
EUR 10,826.15. The Chamber noted that the Claimant had already received the
sum of EUR 11,025 in respect of the solidarity contribution for the transfer of the
player in question.
7
19.
In conclusion, the Dispute Resolution Chamber decides that the claim lodged by
the Club X should be rejected in its entirety as the Claimant has already received
the total amount due and thus has no further right to claim any compensation
from Club Z in respect of the solidarity mechanism for the transfer of the player
in question from the Club W to the Club Z.
III.
Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the Claimant is rejected.
2.
According to art. 61 par. 1 of the FIFA Statutes, this decision may be appealed
before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The statement of appeal must be
sent to the CAS directly within 21 days of receiving notification of this decision
and has to contain all elements in accordance with point 2 of the directives
issued by the CAS, copy of which we enclose hereto. Within another 10 days
following the expiry of the time limit for the filing of the statement of appeal,
the appellant shall file with the CAS a brief stating the facts and legal arguments
giving rise to the appeal (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
For the Dispute Resolution Chamber:
Urs Linsi
General Secretary
Enclosed: CAS directives
8