Training Compensation
Texto da decisão
Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 28 September 2006,
in the following composition:
Slim Aloulou (Tunisia), Chairman
Theo van Seggelen (Netherlands), member
John Didulica (Australia), member
Philippe Diallo (France), member
Essa M. Saleh al-Housani (United Arab Emirates), member
on the claim presented by
the club, A, X
as Claimant
against
the club, B, Y
represented by S
as Respondent
regarding training compensation for the player C
I. Facts of the case
1. The player C, born on 11 September 1985, was registered with the X club A for two
sporting seasons, 2001 and 2002, from the age of 15 to the age of 17.
2. On 1 January 2003 the player C signed his first non-amateur contract with the X club
D (later named D, after the above-mentioned club A took over all the financial
rights and obligations of D) where he was registered for one season, from the age
of 17 to the age of 18.
3. The player C was then registered again as a non-amateur with the X club A from 27
June 2004 until 31 October 2004, between the ages of 18 and 19.
4. On 1 January 2005 the player C signed a Non-Amateur contract with the Y club B.
5. On 30 December 2005 the X club A lodged a claim with FIFA against the Y club B for
training compensation as described in chapter VII of the FIFA Regulations for the
Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2001).
6. According to the X club A, they should be entitled to the amount of training
compensation corresponding to four seasons of training, from 2001, date of the
player C’s first registration with them, until 31 October 2004, date of the expiry of
the player’s employment contract with them.
7. A specify that they should be entitled to receive also the amount of training
compensation corresponding to the seasons in which the player was registered for
the first time as a non-amateur with the X club D, which was later on acquired by A,
and consequently saw its name changed into D.
8. A therefore ask the amount of EUR 180,000, i.e. EUR 45,000 per year of training,
calculated as follows: EUR 90,000 for the two seasons, 2001 and 2002, in which the
player C was registered with them as an amateur; EUR 45,000 for the period starting
as of 1 January 2003 in which the player was registered for the first time as a nonamateur with the X club D, the financial rights of which were later on acquired by A;
EUR 45,000 for the period in which the player was registered again with A, this time
as a non-amateur, until 31 October 2004.
9. The X club was also eager to emphasise that the period between the conclusion of
the player C’s first non-amateur contract with D on 1 January 2003 and the expiry of
the employment contract the player signed with A on 31 October 2004, has to be
considered as a continuum and shall not be regarded as if there had been a change
in the player’s registration, since all the financial rights of D were acquired by A.
Training Compensation for the player C
(A, X / B, Y)
2
10. According to A, it is this very circumstance that entitles them to receive the amount
of training compensation corresponding to four seasons of training.
11. A, however, state that they have offered the player C a new employment contract
(documental evidence provided to FIFA) on 13 August 2004, two-and-a-half months
before the date of expiry of the existing contract.
12. Asked by FIFA to explain the nature of the agreement according to which A acquired
all the financial rights of D, the Football Association of X specified that, before the
start of the season 2004, A purchased the rights and obligations of D, which did not
intend to carry on their activity at the highest level of national football.
13. D, however, did not disappear, nor did they go bankrupt, but were relegated to the
second division and started serving as a reserve team for A. To this effect, D had
their name changed into D.
14. The Football Association of X expressed their view that, although A and D (D) are
two separate legal entities, in view of the fact that A took over all the financial
rights and obligations of D, the former should be entitled to receive any amount of
compensation due to the latter.
15. B maintain in their position that D (D) never ceased to exist and still appear to keep
their autonomous rights and obligations. This fact would be proven by a clause in
the agreement concluded between A and D, whereby it was agreed that the latter
maintained the rights on a certain player, whereas all the other players would be
transferred to A.
16. To this effect, B state that, in compliance with the applicable regulations, A should
not be entitled to receive the amount of training compensation corresponding to
the season in which the player C was registered for the first time as a non-amateur
with the X club D, nor to receive the amount of training compensation
corresponding to the period between 2001 and 2003, when the player was
registered with A as an amateur.
17. As regards A’s entitlement to receive the amount of training compensation
corresponding to the period in which the player was registered again with them,
this time as a non-amateur , until 31 October 2004, B point out that the new
employment contract the X club offered to the player C on 13 August 2004 should
not be regarded as the club’s real intention to keep the player in compliance with
the applicable regulations, since such a new contract would have taken effect only
as of 1 January 2005, i.e. two months after the expiry of the previous employment
contract, thus leaving the player unemployed for a period of two months.
Training Compensation for the player C
(A, X / B, Y)
3
18. Therefore, the fact that A did not offer a proper new contract to the player should
be taken into account in order to conclude that no training compensation is due to
the X club.
19. Finally, and notwithstanding the above, B maintain that, should the Dispute
Resolution Chamber decide that training compensation is due to A, such an amount
should not exceed EUR 15,657.53 corresponding, pro rata, to the period the player C
effectively spent with A from 27 June 2004 until 31 October 2004.
20. The Dispute Resolution Chamber is asked to decide upon the amount due to the X
club A, if any.
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 Article 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 formally submitted to FIFA on 30 December 2005,
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 to the matter at hand.
2.
With regard to the competence of the Chamber, Article 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 Article 24
par. 1 in combination with Article 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
club A for the training and education of the player C.
4.
Subsequently, the members of the Chamber analysed 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 Article 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 non-amateur had been registered for
his new club on 1 January 2005. Equally, the Chamber took note that this claim was
lodged with FIFA on 30 December 2005. In view of the aforementioned, the
Training Compensation for the player C
(A, X / B, Y)
4
Chamber concluded that the former FIFA Regulations for the Status and Transfer of
Players (edition 2001, hereafter: the Regulations) apply to the case at hand as to
the substance.
5.
Once its competence was thus established, the Chamber went on to deal with the
substance of the case and focussed on the crucial questions to be answered in the
case at hand, i.e. whether or not the claimant, A, is entitled to receive training
compensation from the respondent, B, and, if so, the relevant period of training
and education to be taken into consideration.
6.
The members of the Chamber firstly duly noted that, according the X club A, they
should be entitled to the amount of training compensation corresponding to four
seasons of training, from 2001, date of the player C’s first registration with them,
until 31 October 2004, date of the expiry of the player’s employment contract with
them. As A further specify, they should be entitled to receive also the amount of
training compensation corresponding to the seasons in which the player was
registered for the first time as a non-amateur with the X club D, the financial rights
and obligations of which were later on acquired by A, and consequently saw its
name changed into D.
7.
Conversely, attention was given to B’s position, whereby A should not be entitled
to receive the amount of training compensation corresponding to the season in
which the player C was registered for the first time as a non-amateur with the X
club D, nor to receive the amount of training compensation corresponding to the
period between 2001 and 2002, when the player was registered with A as an
amateur.
8.
To this effect, the Chamber analysed the period between the conclusion of the
player C’s first non-amateur contract with D on 1 January 2003 and the expiry of
the employment contract the player signed with D on 31 October 2004, and
wondered whether or not the two aforementioned clubs have to be regarded as
one entity, as maintained by the Claimant and suggested by the Football
Association of X.
9.
Should this be the case, it was underlined, A would, in principle, be entitled to the
amount of compensation corresponding to the above-indicated period.
10. The deciding authority passed therefore to examine the nature of the agreement
according to which, before the start of the season 2004, A acquired all the financial
rights of D, which did not intend to carry on their activity at the highest level of
national football.
Training Compensation for the player C
(A, X / B, Y)
5
11. A thorough analysis of the aforementioned agreement as well as of the facts of this
dispute, and in particular of the statements of the Football Association of X, led the
Chamber to conclude that D did not disappear, nor did they go bankrupt, but were
relegated to the second division and started serving as a reserve team for A. To this
effect, D had their name changed into D. Equally, it was emphasised that, according
to the relevant agreement, a certain player remained registered with the club D
(D). The deciding authority was thus of the unanimous opinion that the two clubs A
and D (D) have to be considered as two separate legal entities and, therefore, the
move of a specific player from one to the other of these two clubs constitutes a
change of registration.
12. The Dispute Resolution Chamber therefore emphasised that, in accordance with
Chapter VII of the Regulations and Chapter III of the Regulations governing the
Application of the Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players (hereafter
referred to as Application Regulations) as well as the FIFA circular letter no. 826
dated 31 October 2002, A have no right to receive the amount of training
compensation corresponding to the years the player spent with the other X club D
(D) which, it was once again stated, maintains its status as a separate legal entity.
13. As regards the X club A’s request to be awarded the amount of compensation
corresponding to the period between 2001 and 2002, when the player was
registered with them as an amateur, the Chamber made reference to the FIFA
circular letter no. 826 dated 31 October 2002, whereby, once the player has signed
his first non-amateur contract and in case of subsequent transfers as a nonamateur, the entitlement to receive training compensation remains with the
player’s last club only (cf. point (ii) paragraph 3 of the said circular).
14. Therefore, A are not entitled to receive the amount of compensation
corresponding to the period between 2001 and 200s, when the player was
registered with them as an amateur. In fact, through the signing his first nonamateur contract with D, the chain related to the entitlement to training
compensation for the player C was broken.
15. Conversely, the Chamber took note of B’s position, whereby A did not offer a
proper contract to the player and this fact should be taken into account in order to
conclude that no training compensation is due to the X club.
16. In this respect, after having scrutinised the contact that A offered to C on 13 August
2004, the Chamber concluded that this offer is a proper one and that the
procrastinated start of the new employment agreement was only conceived so as to
reflect the start of the new season in X.
Training Compensation for the player C
(A, X / B, Y)
6
17. The Chamber hence concluded that, on account of the fact that A offered a
contract to the player, for the purposes of the applicable regulations the X club is
entitled to receive training compensation from the Y club.
18. As far as the calculation of the amount of compensation due to the X club is
concerned, according to the classification of clubs outlined in the FIFA circular letter
no. 826, the Y club B belongs to category 2 (indicative amount of EUR 60,000 per
year), whereas the X club A belongs to category 3 (indicative amount of EUR 30,000
per year).
19. The relevant amount of compensation is to be calculated in accordance with the
parameters provided by Article 7 paragraph 4 a) of the Application Regulations, i.e.
with an amount corresponding to the average of the training costs between the
two different categories.
20. In particular, the deciding body acknowledged that the period to be taken into
account, in light of the above-mentioned considerations, is from 27 June 2004 until
31 October 2004.
21. In view of the above, and taking into particular consideration the submission of the
Y club with respect to the amount they would be prepared to pay in case the
deciding authority recognised a right to training compensation for A, the Dispute
Resolution Chamber decided that the respondent, B, must pay to the claimant, A,
training compensation in the amount of EUR 15,657.53 corresponding, pro rata, to
the period the player C effectively spent with the X club as a non-amateur from 27
June 2004 until 31 October 2004.
III. Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim of the claimant, A, is partially accepted.
2.
The respondent, B, must pay to the claimant the amount of EUR 15,657.53 within
30 days of notification of this decision.
3.
In the event that the amount of EUR 15,657.53 is not paid within the stated
deadline, an interest rate of 5% per year will apply as of expiry of the
aforementioned deadline and the case will immediately be presented to the FIFA
Disciplinary Committee.
4.
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.
Training Compensation for the player C
(A, X / B, Y)
7
5.
According to Article 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
For the Dispute Resolution Chamber:
__________________
Urs Linsi
General Secretary
Enclosed: CAS directives
Training Compensation for the player C
(A, X / B, Y)
8