Acórdão do FIFA, processo Listkowski_2021-09-03

Data

03/09/2021

Fonte

inside.fifa.com

Training Compensation

Texto da decisão

REF TMS 7515

Decision of the
Single Judge of the sub-committee of
The Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 23 July 2021
regarding training compensation for the player Marcin Listkowski

BY:

Philippe Diallo (France), Single Judge of the sub-committee of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber

CLAIMANT:

RKS Rakow Czestochowa, Poland
RESPONDENT:

US Lecce, Italy

Page 2 of 11

REF TMS 7515

I. FACTS OF THE CASE
Player:

Marcin LISTKOWSKI

Date of birth:

10 February 1998

Player passport (‘Second Player Passport’):

Season
09/10
10/11
11/12
12/13
13/14
13/14
14/15

Club(s)
‘RKS Lech Rypin’
‘RKS Lech Rypin’
‘RKS Lech Rypin’
‘RKS Lech Rypin’
‘RKS Lech Rypin’
‘Pogon Szczecin’
‘Pogon Szczecin’

15/16

‘Pogon Szczecin’

16/17
17/18
18/19
18/19
19/20
19/20
20/21
20/21

‘Pogon Szczecin’
‘Pogon Szczecin’
‘Pogon Szczecin’
‘Rakow Czestochowa’
‘Rakow Czestochowa’
‘Pogon Szczecin’
‘Pogon Szczecin’
‘US Lecce’

Sporting season:

issued by the Polish Football Association (‘PZPN’)
on 17 February 2021:

Registration dates
02.09.2009 – 30.06.2010
01.07.2010 – 30.06.2011
01.07.2011 – 30.06.2012
01.07.2012 – 30.06.2013
01.07.2013 – 03.03.2014
03.03.2014 – 30.06.2014
01.07.2014 – 30.06.2015
01.07.2015 – 29.02.2016
01.03.2016 - 30.06.2016
01.07.2016 – 30.06.2017
01.07.2017 – 30.06.2018
01.07.2018 – 09.08.2018
09.08.2018 – 30.06.2019
01.07.2019 – 10.07.2019
10.07.2019 – 30.06.2020
01.07.2020 – 01.09.2020
From 02.09.2020

1 July to 30 June (Poland)

Additional Player passport (‘First Player Passport’):
Season
09/10
10/11
11/12
12/13
13/14
13/14
14/15
15/16
16/17
17/18

Status
Amateur (Permanent)
Amateur (Permanent)
Amateur (Permanent)
Amateur (Permanent)
Amateur (Permanent)
Amateur (Permanent)
Amateur (Permanent)
Amateur (Permanent)
Professional (Permanent)
Professional (Permanent)
Professional (Permanent)
Professional (Permanent)
Professional (Temporary)
Professional (Temporary)
Professional (Permanent)
Professional (Permanent)
Professional (Permanent)

Club(s)
‘RKS Lech Rypin’
‘RKS Lech Rypin’
‘RKS Lech Rypin’
‘RKS Lech Rypin’
‘RKS Lech Rypin’
‘Pogon Szczecin’
‘Pogon Szczecin’
‘Pogon Szczecin’
‘Pogon Szczecin’
‘Pogon Szczecin’

issued by the PZPN on an unknown date

Status
Amateur (Permanent)
Amateur (Permanent)
Amateur (Permanent)
Amateur (Permanent)
Amateur (Permanent)
- (Permanent)
- (Permanent)
- (Permanent)
- (Permanent)
- (Permanent)

Page 3 of 11

REF TMS 7515

18/19
18/19
19/20
19/20
20/21
20/21

‘Pogon Szczecin’
‘Rakow Czestochowa’
‘Rakow Czestochowa’
‘Pogon Szczecin’
‘Pogon Szczecin’
‘US Lecce’

01.07.2018 – 09.08.2018
09.08.2018 – 30.06.2019
01.07.2019 – 10.07.2019
10.07.2019 – 30.06.2020
01.07.2020 – 01.09.2020
From 02.09.2020

- (Permanent)
Professional (Temporary)
Professional (Temporary)
Professional (Permanent)
Professional (Permanent)
Professional (Permanent)

Transfer:

9 September 2020 from MKS Pogon Szczecin (Poland) to US Lecce (Italy)

Claimant club:

RKS Rakow Czestochowa (Poland)

Respondent club:

US Lecce (Italy)

Former club:

MKS Pogon Szczecin (Poland)

Claim and Response:
1. On 30 December 2020, the Claimant claimed training compensation in the amount of EUR
41,178.08 on the basis of the Player’s subsequent registration as a professional with the
Respondent. The Claimant additionally requested interest of 5% p.a. as of 3 October 2020.
2. The claim of the Claimant is based on the First Player Passport on the basis of which the Claimant
claimed that it had trained the Player on a temporary, i.e. loan, basis, inter alia, between 9 August
2018 and 10 July 2019, i.e. for 325 days of the sporting season of the Player’s 21st birthday as the
relevant training period.
3. On 17 February 2021, the PZPN provided clarifications to the FIFA administration concerning the
First Player Passport and provided the Second Player Passport.
4. On 18 February 2021, the FIFA administration submitted a proposal to the parties suggesting that
the Respondent should pay the amount of EUR 40,191.78 to the Claimant as training
compensation, plus 5% interest p.a. as of the due date.
5. On 3 March 2021 the Respondent rejected the proposal and on 22 March 2021 submitted its
position arguing the following:
a. the Claimant is not entitled to training compensation:
(i) the Claimant is not considered as the Player’s former club in the sense of the
Transfer and art. 3, par. 1 of Annexe 4 of the FIFA RSTP;
(ii) the Claimant had already received immediate benefit from the Transfer of a fully
trained player so rewarding it with training compensation would entitle it to
“double compensation for the same transfer”;

Page 4 of 11

REF TMS 7515

(iii) the Player had completed his training before joining the Claimant in the context of
art. 1, par. 1 of Annexe 4 of the FIFA RSTP and should be considered as a “fully
trained professional” with 67 appearances for the Former Club and 27 appearances
for the youth teams of PZPN; the Respondent supported this claim by a letter from
the Former Club by which the Player had played 83 matches for the Former Club
and 36 matches for the PZPN youth teams during his registration with the Former
Club before joining the Claimant;
b. in the alternative that the FIFA DRC decides to award training compensation to the
Claimant, it should calculate the Player’s relevant training period with the Claimant up to
15 June 2019 and not until 30 June 2019 due to the Player returning to the Former Club
before the expiry of the registration in the Second Player Passport for which it submitted
the following evidence:
(i) amendment of the temporary transfer agreement between the Former Club and
the Claimant from 11 June 2019 shortening the end date of the loan to 15 June
2019;
(ii) letter from PZPN from 8 March 2021 confirming that the Second Player’s Passport
shows a longer period than 15 June 2019 because the deregistration could not
have been processed outside of the transfer period; and
(iii) statement of the Player from 9 March 2021 that it had returned to the Former Club
on 15 June 2021.
6. The Claimant did not respond to the proposal.

II. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS
Applicable law:

RSTP: June 2019 edition.
Procedural Rules: January 2021 edition.

Jurisdiction:

Yes, uncontested

Admissible:

Yes, uncontested

Decision:
1.

The claim of the Claimant is based on the subsequent professional registration of the Player with
the Respondent on 9 September 2020.

It is undisputed that the Player was registered for the first time as a professional with the Former
Club on 1 March 2016, i.e. during the season of his 18th birthday.

Further, it is undisputed that the Player was subsequently registered as a professional with the
Respondent on 9 September 2016, i.e. during the season of his 23rd birthday.

Page 5 of 11

REF TMS 7515

The Single Judge of the sub-committee of the DRC examined the Second Player Passport and
established that the Player was temporarily registered with the Claimant between 9 August 2018
and 10 July 2019 as follows:
a. season of 21st birthday: from 9 August 2018 until 30 June 2019; and
b. season of 22nd birthday: from 1 July 2019 until 10 July 2019.

In accordance with art. 1 par. 1 and art. 2 par. 1 lit. b) of Annexe 4 of the RSTP, training
compensation is due when a professional is transferred between clubs of two different
associations before the end of the season of his 23rd birthday for training incurred up to the age
of 21, unless it is evident that the player has already terminated his training before the age of
21.

The Respondent contested the entitlement of the Claimant to receive training compensation in
connection with the Player’s subsequent professional contract with it arguing that the Claimant
should not be considered as the Player’s former club in the context of art. 3, par. 1. of Annexe
4 of the RSTP and because it believes that the Claimant has been sufficiently rewarded by having
a fully trained player available within its squad during the loan period.

The Single Judge noted that the Player had been on loan with the Claimant and that in
accordance with the DRC jurisprudence on loans, when a player registers with a club affiliated
to a different member association (in casu, the Respondent) from the one where he was
previously registered (in casu, the Former Club), any club(s) that may have had the player on loan
from the player’s former club are entitled to claim training compensation from the new club (in
casu, the Claimant).

The responsibility to pay the training compensation remains with the Respondent since, as a
general rule, only the party entitled to a right, i.e. only the club entitled to training compensation
can waive this right, in casu the Former Club. Therefore, any such waivers are valid only for the
Former Club and not to the Claimant as it is also entitled to training compensation.

Further, the Respondent contested the entitlement of the Claimant to receive training
compensation as the Player had allegedly completed his training with the Former Club in the
context of art. 1. para. 1. of Annexe 4 of the RSTP as he had allegedly made 67 appearances for
the Former Club and 27 appearances for the youth teams of PZPN before joining the Claimant
on loan.

10.

In accordance with art. 1 para. 1 of the Annexe 4 of the RSTP, training compensation is not due
if “it is evident that a player has already terminated his training period before the age of 21”.

11.

The jurisprudence established by the Dispute Resolution Chamber in this respect foresees that
several objective factors shall be taken into account when assessing if a player has terminated
his education and prior to the end of his 21st birthday season. Both the DRC and CAS have
always adopted a strict approach in this sense

Page 6 of 11

REF TMS 7515

12.

Such factors are, included but not limited to:
a. number of appearances with the senior team of a club;
b. the player’s value at the former club (established through the salary, any loan fee paid
by loaning clubs, transfer fee paid);
c. appearances at international level;
d. number of loans when at the former club; and
e. the player’s notoriety and reputation.

13.

The Single Judge examined the evidence presented by the Respondent and noted that from the
letter from the Former Club it can be established that the player had played in over 100 matches
for the Former Club and the PZPN youth teams combined and that he had been provided
extensive training with the Former Club. However, the Single Judge concluded that the
appearances and type of training provided cannot be used as sufficient evidence in that regard
to prove that the temporary loan transfer to the Claimant competing in a lower tier of
competition had not been used to provide him with regular playing opportunities in order to
further develop his skills as part of his training.

14.

Considering the lack of evidence provided by the Respondent in support of the allegation that
the Player had completed his training and education before the end of the season of his 21st
birthday, in line with art. 12 par. 3 of the Procedural Rules, such argumentation shall be set
aside.

15.

Consequently, the Claimant is entitled to receive training compensation in connection with the
registration of the Player as a professional with the Respondent.

16.

It remained uncontested that the Respondent did not pay to the Claimant the training
compensation due as a result of the Player’s subsequent professional contract with the
Respondent.

17.

The amount of training compensation to be paid by a club registering a professional following
a transfer between clubs of two different associations before the end of the season of his 23 rd
birthday to the club with which the latter was previously registered and that contributed to his
training is calculated on a pro rata basis according to the period of training that the player spent
with that club (cfr. art 3, par. 1 of Annexe 4 of the RSTP).

18.

When a professional is transferred between clubs of two different associations before the end
of the end of the season of his 23rd birthday, the training compensation payable is calculated by
taking the relevant training costs multiplied by the number of years of training at the former
club (cfr. Art. 5 par. 3 of Annexe 4 of the RSTP).

Page 7 of 11

REF TMS 7515

19.

Concerning the training period of the Player with the Claimant, the Single Judge examined the
evidence presented by the Respondent that the loan between the Former Club and the Claimant
had been terminated on 15 June 2019 and that the Player had left the Claimant on that date,
i.e. before 10 July 2019 as shown in the Second Player Passport. In that sense, the Single Judge
established that, based on the amendment of the loan transfer agreement, letter from PZPN and
the statement of the Player himself, the effective training period of the Player with the Claimant
ended on 15 June 2019 during the season of the Player’s 21st birthday.

20.

Therefore, the Claimant is entitled to training compensation for the following period of training
of the Player:
a. 2018-2019 season (season of the Player’s 21st birthday): from 9 August 2018 until 15
June 2019, i.e. 311 days.

21.

When a Player is moving between clubs of two different associations inside the territory of the
EU/EEA, the amount of training compensation payable shall be established based on the training
categories of both clubs, i.e. either average training costs of two clubs if the player moves from
a lower to a higher category club or training costs of the lower-category club if the player moves
from a higher to a lower category club (cfr. art. 6.1. of Annexe 4 of the RSTP).

22.

The Former Club belonged to UEFA training category III when the Player registered with the
Respondent, i.e. EUR 30,000 per season.

23.

The Respondent belonged to UEFA training category II when the Player registered with it, i.e.
EUR 60,000 per season.

24.

Therefore, because the Player moved from a lower to a higher category club, the training cost is
calculated on the basis of the average training costs of both clubs, i.e. EUR 45,000 per season.

25.

The training costs are calculated as follows:
a. 2018-2019 season - on the basis of EUR 45,000 per season:
EUR 45,000 x (311 / 365) = 38,342.47

26.

The Claimant is entitled to receive EUR 38,342.47 as training compensation.

27.

The Claimant requested EUR 41,178.08.

28.

Additionally, since the Claimant requested the payment of the relevant interests as of 3 October
2021, the Single Judge noted that the interest on training compensation is calculated as from
31 days from the relevant professional registration. In that sense, the Single Judge of the subcommittee of the DRC established that the Claimant is entitled to receive 5% interests p.a. as
of 10 October 2020.

Page 8 of 11

REF TMS 7515

29.

As a result, the Claim of the Claimant is partially accepted.

30.

No procedural costs are levied (cfr. art 18.1 of Procedural Rules).

31.

Art. 24 bis is applicable.

Page 9 of 11

REF TMS 7515

III. DECISION
1.

The claim of the Claimant, RKS Rakow Czestochowa, is partially accepted.

The Respondent, US Lecce, shall pay to the Claimant:
-

EUR 38,342.47 as training compensation, plus 5% interest per annum on that amount as
from 10 October 2020, until the date of effective payment.

The Claimant shall immediately inform the Respondent of the bank account to which the
Respondent must pay the due amount (including all applicable interest).

The Respondent shall provide evidence of payment of the due amount in accordance with this
decision to [email protected], duly translated, if applicable, into one of the official FIFA
languages (English, French, German, Spanish).

If the due amount (including all applicable interest) is not paid by the Respondent within 45 days
as from notification of the bank account details, 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 and for the maximum duration of three
entire and consecutive registration periods.



2. The ban will be lifted immediately, and prior to its complete serving, following confirmation
that the due amount (including all applicable interest) has been received by the Claimant.
3. In the event that the payable amount as per in this decision is still not paid by the end of
the ban of three entire and consecutive registration periods, the present matter shall be
submitted, upon request, to the FIFA Disciplinary Committee.
6.

No procedural costs are payable (cf. arts. 17 par. 1 and 18 par. 1 of the Rules Governing the
Procedure of the Players’ Status Committee and Dispute Resolution Chamber)

For the Single Judge of the sub-committee of the DRC:

Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer

Page 10 of 11

REF TMS 7515

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 20 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 11 of 11