Training Compensation
Texto da decisão
TMS 10810
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 10 October 2022
regarding training compensation in relation with the registration of the player
Maxuel De Cassio DA SILVA
BY:
Frans de Weger (the Netherlands), Chairperson of the Dispute Resolution
Chamber of the Football Tribunal
CLAIMANT:
PRIMAVERA - SP, Brazil
RESPONDENT:
SC FARENSE, Portugal
Page 2 of 12
TMS 10810
I. FACTS OF THE CASE
Player:
Maxuel De Cassio DA SILVA
Date of birth:
31 January 2000
Player passport(s):
(1) issued by the Confederação Brasileira de Futebol (CBF) on 8
September 2021
Season Birthday Club(s)
Registration dates
Status
2018
18th
10/09/18 – 31/12/18
Amateur
2019
19
Primavera – SP
(permanent)
th
Primavera – SP
01/01/19 – 17/06/19
Amateur
(permanent)
Primavera – SP
18/06/19 – 26/06/19
Professional
(permanent)
Botafogo
27/06/19 – 31/12/19
Professional (on loan
from Primavera – SP)
2020
20th
Botafogo
01/01/20 – 30/11/20
Professional (on loan
from Primavera – SP)
Primavera – SP
01/12/20 – 31/12/20
Professional
(permanent)
2021
21
st
Primavera – SP
01/01/21 – 22/08/21
Professional
(permanent)
CF Esperança Lagos
23/08/21 – 31/12/21
Professional (on loan
from Primavera – SP)
2022
22nd
CF Esperança Lagos
01/01/22 – 31/05/22
Professional (on loan
from Primavera – SP)
Primavera – SP
01/06/22 – 13/06/22
Professional
(permanent)
(2) issued by the Federação Portuguesa de Futebol (FPF)
Year
Birthday Club(s)
Registration dates
Status
2021
21st
CF Esperança Lagos
31/08/21 – 31/12/21
Professional
2022
22
CF Esperança Lagos
01/01/22 – 31/05/22
Professional
26/07/22 -
Professional
nd
SC Farense
Page 3 of 12
TMS 10810
Transfer (as per the information available in TMS):
31 August 2021, from Primavera – SP (Brazil) to CF Esperança Lagos
(Portugal) as a professional (on loan)
It is indicated in TMS that the player’s contract with CF Esperança
Lagos was valid until 31 May 2022
Within the loan instruction, Primavera – SP confirmed the end of the
loan and indicated that the contract it had with the player expired on
13 June 2022. The ITC was not requested by the CBF after the end of
the loan.
Claimant:
Primavera – SP (Brazil)
Respondent:
SC Farense (Portugal)
UEFA, category III (EUR 30,000 per year)
Claim and Response:
1.
On 27 July 2022, the Claimant requested EUR 83,836 as training compensation plus 5%
interest p.a. “as of the due date until the date of effective payment” for the registration of
the player as a professional with the Respondent.
2.
The claim of the Claimant is based on media reports and the announcement made by
the Respondent of the signature of the player on social media on 19 May 2022..
3.
With its claim, the Claimant provided a signed statement issued by the CBF on 25 July
2022 in which it is confirmed that the player was registered with the Claimant as follows:
a. As an amateur as from 10 September 2018 until 17 June 2019; and
b. As a professional as from 18 June 2019 until 26 June 2019 and as from 1
December 2020 until 13 June 2022;
4.
On 29 August 2022, the Respondent rejected the claim of the Claimant.
5.
The Respondent considered that CF Esperança Lagos was the former club of the player.
6.
In addition, the Respondent underlined that the Claimant did not meet its burden of
proving that it was the former club in the sense of the RSTP, notably by failing to provide
a player passport as defined in the RSTP.
Page 4 of 12
TMS 10810
7.
In continuation, the Respondent stated that it did register the player via a national
transfer, as evidenced by the FPF player passport, and therefore it created a legitimate
expectation that no training compensation in the sense of the RSTP would be due. In
fact, the Respondent explained that because there had been no ITC required to be
requested when it registered the player, the said registration of the player with the
Respondent would not qualify as an international transfer potentially triggering training
compensation entitlement(s) as per the RSTP.
8.
Alternatively, the Respondent requested, should training compensation be due, that the
player should be considered to have been registered with the Claimant as from 10
August 2018 until 26 June 2019 and as form 1 January 2020 until 30 August 2021 only.
9.
On 20 September 2022, the Claimant contested the allegations of the Respondent.
10.
First, the Claimant submitted a copy of the CBF player passport, stipulating that the
player had inter alia been loaned to CF Esperança Lagos as from 31 August 2021 until 31
May 2022.
11.
The Claimant provided a copy of the contract it had with the player, which according to
the Claimant was valid as from 18 June 2019 until 13 June 2022, as well as a copy of the
loan agreement it had with CF Esperança Lagos. Both documents were not provided with
their respective translation in one of the official FIFA languages.
12.
The Claimant also provided a TMS report in relation to the transfer of the player from
the Claimant to CF Esperança Lagos, which stipulates that the player was indeed loaned
to CF Esperança Lagos by the Claimant from 31 August 2021 until 31 May 2022.
13.
With regard to the ITC, the Claimant underlined that on 19 May 2022, i.e. before the end
of the loan of the player with CF Esperança Lagos and before the end of the player’s
contract with the Claimant, the Respondent had already announced the signing of the
player. At the end of the loan with CF Esperança Lagos, the Claimant stated that it
requested the player to return until the end of their contract (i.e. until 13 June 2022), but
that the player asked permission to remain in Portugal as he was supposed to register
with the Respondent within days. As such, the Claimant indicated that, in good faith, it
accepted the player’s request and did not request the ITC back, although it insisted that
the player was to be considered registered with it until 13 June 2022.
14.
As to the amount of training compensation requested, the Claimant amended its claim
and requested EUR 45,616 plus interest.
15.
On 26 September 2022, the Respondent stated that the fact that the ITC was not
requested back by the Claimant at the end of the player’s loan with CF Esperança Lagos
Page 5 of 12
TMS 10810
misled the Respondent into signing the player and insisted that because it had acted
under the legitimate expectation that the player was permanently registered with CF
Esperança Lagos until 31 May 2022, no training compensation shall be expected to be
paid.
16.
In continuation, the Respondent underlined that the player’s contract and the loan
agreement provided by the Claimant shall be disregarded since they were not translated
in any of the official FIFA languages.
17.
Finally, the Respondent that in the alternative, the Claimant shall be awarded training
compensation of EUR 45,616.42 only.
II. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS
Applicable law:
Decision:
1.
Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (RSTP): July 2022
edition
Procedural Rules Governing the Football Tribunal (Procedural Rules):
October 2021 edition
The claim of the Claimant is based on the subsequent registration of the player as a
professional with the Respondent.
2.
The Respondent held that no training compensation was due to the Claimant since it
was not the former club in the sense of the RSTP.
3.
In fact, the Respondent is of the opinion that because no ITC was required to be
requested when it registered the player on 26 July 2022, due to the fact that the Claimant
did not follow the required procedures foreseen in the RSTP, the registration in question
qualified as a national transfer intra FPF, which created the legitimate expectation that
the said transfer would not trigger any training compensation as foreseen in the RSTP.
4.
As per the information available in TMS, the player was loaned by the Claimant to CF
Esperança Lagos on 31 August 2022. In addition, the parties indicated that the player
would be loaned until 31 May 2022 to CF Esperança Lagos.
5.
This is consistent with the position of the Claimant.
Page 6 of 12
TMS 10810
6.
Equally, the Respondent did not bring any evidence which would contradict the fact that
the player had been loaned by the Claimant to CF Esperança Lagos.
7.
Therefore, it is established that the player was temporarily loaned from the Claimant to
CF Esperança Lagos between 31 August 2021 and 31 May 2022.
8.
It is uncontested that after the end of the abovementioned loan, the player was under
valid employment contract with the Claimant until 13 June 2022.
9.
Equally, the Respondent did not bring any evidence to contradict such fact.
10.
As such, it is considered that the player was under valid employment contract with the
Claimant until 13 June 2022, and that the Claimant is to be considered the former club
of the player in the sense of the RSTP.
11.
It is uncontested that the ITC of the player was not returned to the CBF after the end of
the player’s loan with CF Esperança Lagos.
12.
The Claimant admitted not having requested it since the contract that tied it to the player
was set to expire and that the Respondent had already announced since 19 May 2022
that the player was to sign a contract with the Respondent.
13.
The announcement of the signature of the player by the Respondent on its social media
channel on 19 May 2022 is not challenged by the Respondent.
14.
Although the Claimant should not be excused for not following the registration
procedures set out in the RSTP, one could understand that it could opt for not requesting
back the ITC from the FPF given that the player was set to continue his career in Portugal
and that 13 days of contractual relationship between the player and the Claimant were
left.
15.
However, since the ITC never returned to the CBF after the expiry of the loan, the period
between the end of the loan and the end of the contract of the player with the Claimant
cannot be considered as a period during which the player was registered with the
Claimant.
16.
Therefore, it is established that the player was registered with the Claimant:
a. As from 10 September 2018 until 26 June 2019; and
b. As from 1 December 2020 until 22 August 2021.
Page 7 of 12
TMS 10810
17.
As to the argumentation of the Respondent regarding the alleged legitimate expectation
that the player was permanently registered with CF Esperança Lagos and that as such it
registered the player as national transfer, the Respondent did not submit any evidence
that it had proactively sought information related to the player’s status with CF
Esperança Lagos nor received authoritative information that the player was
permanently registered with CF Esperança Lagos. One could have expected the
Respondent to request such information before signing the player to a professional
contract.
18.
In fact, and as previously mentioned, it is undisputed that in or around 19 May 2022, the
Respondent announced the signing of the player for the 2022/2023 season, when the
player was still under contract with CF Esperança Lagos (and in extenso with the
Claimant).
19.
Any discussion related to the ITC (or lack of thereof) and of the mention of a national
registration of the player with the Respondent under the auspices of the FPF on 26 July
2022 are related to facts that occurred after the Respondent announced having signed
the player to a professional contract on 19 May 2022.
20.
Such timeline of events suggests that the Respondent at best acted without due
diligence by signing the player to a professional contract without having obtained
authoritative information about the player’s status with CF Esperança Lagos.
21.
Equally, there is no evidence on file which suggest that the FPF and/or the CBF disclosed
any erroneous or misleading information to the Respondent before it announced the
signing of the player.
22.
Based on all the above, the good faith of the Claimant shall be protected, and its
potential entitlement to training compensation in relation to the registration cannot be
jeopardised in the present matter since, based on the evidence available, the sequence
of events suggests that the Respondent had in any case already signed the player to a
professional contract before any dispute related to the ITC arose and that as such the
absence of return of the ITC after the end of the loan did not induce the Respondent in
error when recruiting the player.
23.
As previously determined, the player was registered with the Claimant:
a. As from 10 September 2018 until 26 June 2019; and
b. As from 1 December 2020 until 22 August 2021.
Page 8 of 12
TMS 10810
24.
It is undisputed that the player subsequently registered with the Respondent as a
professional on 26 July 2022, i.e. during the course of the calendar year of the player’s
22nd birthday, as an out of contract player.
25.
As such, training compensation is due.
26.
Art. 3 par. 1 of Annexe 4 of the RSTP stipulates that in the case of subsequent transfers
of the professional, training compensation will only be owed to his former club for the
time he was effectively trained by that club.
27.
As such, the Claimant is entitled to receive training compensation for the subsequent
professional registration of the player with the Respondent.
28.
According to art. 3 par. 2 of Annexe 4 RSTP, the deadline for payment of training
compensation is 30 days following the registration of the professional with the new
association.
29.
The player registered with the Respondent on 26 July 2022.
30.
Thus, the Respondent had to pay any due training compensation by 25 August 2022.
31.
It is undisputed that to date the Respondent did not pay training compensation to the
Claimant.
32.
As per art. 5 par. 2 of Annexe 4 RSTP in combination with 3 par. 1 of Annexe 4 RSTP, in
the case of subsequent transfers, training compensation is calculated based on the
training costs of the new club multiplied by the number of years of training with the
former club, or on a pro rata basis if less than one year.
33.
The Respondent was classified under UEFA training category III when registering the
player. The yearly amount foreseen for UEFA category III clubs is EUR 30,000, which shall
be the yearly amount taken into account in the present dispute.
34.
The Claimant is entitled to training compensation for the time it had the player
registration, which corresponds to:
a. 2018: 113 days of registration (as from 10 September until 31 December 2018);
b. 2019: 177 days (as from 1 January until 26 June 2019);
c. 2020: 31 days (as from 1 December until 31 December 2020); and
d. 2021: 234 days (as from 1 January until 22 August 2021).
Page 9 of 12
TMS 10810
35.
Therefore, the Claimant shall receive training compensation in the amount of EUR
45,616.
36.
The Claimant requested the award of interest rate of 5% per annum, “as per the due date”.
37.
As a result in line with the common practice of the DRC, the Claimant is entitled to receive
5% interest per annum as from the date at which training compensation became overdue
to the Claimant, that is to say as from 26 August 2022. The interest rate of 5% per annum
on EUR 45,616 shall apply until the date of effective payment of the outstanding training
compensation and its applicable interest.
38.
The claim of the Claimant is accepted.
39.
According to art. 25 par. 2 of the Procedural Rules, procedural costs are payable for
disputes between clubs regarding the payment of solidarity contribution.
40.
The Claimant claimed the amount of EUR 45,616.
41.
Thus, the amount claimed by the Claimant corresponds to an amount lower than USD
49,999.
42.
Therefore, procedural costs levied in this respect are fixed to USD 5,000 (cf. art. 2 of
Annexe 1 to the Procedural Rules.
43.
According to art. 25 par. 5 of the Procedural Rules, the chamber will decide the amount
that each party is due to pay, in consideration of the parties’ degree of success and their
conduct during the procedure, as well as any advance of costs paid. In exceptional
circumstances, the chamber may order that FIFA assumes all procedural costs.
44.
In view the specific circumstances of the case, procedural costs shall be set at USD 3,000.
45.
In view of the outcome of the claim, said costs shall be borne by the Respondent.
46.
Art. 24 is applicable.
Page 10 of 12
TMS 10810
III. DECISION
1. The claim of the Claimant, Primavera - SP, is accepted.
2. The Respondent, SC Farense, shall pay to the Claimant EUR 45,616 as training
compensation, plus 5% interest p.a. on that amount, as from 26 August 2022 until the date
of effective payment.
3. Full payment (including all applicable interest) shall be made to the bank account indicated
in the enclosed Bank Account Registration Form.
4. Pursuant to article 24 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players if full
payment (including all applicable interest) is not paid within 45 days of notification of this
decision, the following consequences shall apply:
▪
1. The Respondent shall be banned from registering any new players, either nationally
or internationally, up until the due amount is paid. The maximum duration of the
ban shall be of three entire and consecutive registration periods.
2. The present matter shall be submitted, upon request, to the FIFA Disciplinary
Committee in the event that full payment (including all applicable interest) is still
not paid by the end of the of the three entire and consecutive registration periods.
5. The consequences shall only be enforced at the request of the Claimant.
6. The final costs of the proceedings in the amount of USD 3,000 are to be paid by the
Respondent to FIFA with reference to case no. TMS 10810 (cf. note relating to the payment
of the procedural costs below).
For the Football Tribunal:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
Page 11 of 12
TMS 10810
NOTE RELATED TO THE APPEAL PROCEDURE:
Pursuant to article 58 paragraph 1 of the FIFA Statutes, this decision may be appealed before
the Court of Arbitration for Sport within 21 days of notification.
NOTE RELATED TO PUBLICATION:
FIFA may publish this decision. For reasons of confidentiality, FIFA may decide, at the request
of a party within five days of the notification of the motivated decision, to publish an
anonymised or a redacted version (cf. article 17 of the Procedural Rules).
CONTACT INFORMATION:
Fédération Internationale de Football Association
FIFA-Strasse 20 P.O. Box 8044 Zurich Switzerland
www.fifa.com | legal.fifa.com | [email protected] | T: +41 (0)43 222 7777
Page 12 of 12