Training Compensation
Texto da decisão
REF TMS 12281
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 19 December 2023
regarding training compensation for the
player ALBION MARKU
BY:
Mr. Roy Vermeer (the Netherlands), Single Judge of the Dispute
Resolution Chamber of the Football Tribunal
CLAIMANT:
Laçi, Albania
RESPONDENT:
Dinamo City, Albania
Page 2 of 11
REF TMS 12281
I. FACTS OF THE CASE
Player:
ALBION MARKU
Date of birth:
14 October 2000
Player passport (s):
- issued by the Football Association of Albania (FSHF):
Year
2014
2015
Birthday Club(s)
th
th
th
th
th
th
th
th
th
th
th
th
th
th
st
st
st
22
nd
22
nd
22
nd
14
15
15
15
2016
16
16
16
2017
2018
2019
17
18
19
19
2020
20
20
20
2021
21
21
21
2022
Registration dates
Status
Shenkoll U15 Lezhe
13/11/14
31/12/14
Amateur
Shenkoll U15 Lezhe
01/01/15
28/02/15
Amateur
FK Shenkoll U15 Lezhe
01/03/15
29/10/15
Amateur
FK Shenkoll U17 Lezhe
30/10/15
31/12/15
Amateur
FK Shenkoll U17 Lezhe
01/01/16
09/02/16
Amateur
Brians Lezhe
10/02/16
20/10/16
Amateur
Shkendija Tr. Tirana
21/10/16
31/12/16
Amateur
Shkendija Tr. Tirana
01/01/17
31/12/17
Amateur
Shkendija Tr. Tirana
01/01/18
31/12/18
Amateur
Shkendija Tr. Tirana
01/01/19
30/06/19
Amateur
NK Lokomotiva Kroaci
06/07/19
31/12/19
Professional
NK Lokomotiva Kroaci
01/01/20
20/01/20
Professional
Laçi
31/01/20
15/09/20
Pro (on loan)
Laçi
02/10/20
31/12/20
Pro (on loan)
Laçi
01/01/21
13/06/21
Pro (on loan)
NK Lokomotiva Kroaci
14/06/21
30/06/21
Professional
NK Partizani Tirane
03/09/21
31/12/21
Pro (on loan)
NK Partizani Tirane
01/01/22
14/06/22
Pro (on loan)
NK Lokomotiva Kroaci
15/06/22
28/08/22
Professional
Dinamo City
30/08/22
00/00/00
Professional
Date of transfer: 30 August 2022 from NK Lokomotiva Kroaci (Croatia) to Dinamo City
(Albania)
Claimant club:
Laçi (Albania)
Respondent club: Dinamo City (Albania)
UEFA, category III (EUR 30,000 per year)
Page 3 of 11
REF TMS 12281
Claim and Response:
1.
On 2 February 2023, the Claimant lodged the present claim and requested
EUR 41,095.89 as training compensation on the basis of the subsequent registration as
a professional of the player with the Respondent, plus 5% interest p.a. as of the due date
of payment.
2.
The Claimant is basing its claim on the jurisprudence developed by the Dispute
Resolution Chamber (DRC) according to which a club which had the player on loan from
next club should the player be registered permanently as a professional.
3.
In particular, the Claimant relied on the FSHF player passport of reference and held that
it should get rewarded for having trained the player from 31.01.2020 until 13.06.2021 .
4.
In addition, for the purpose of its calculations, the Claimant acknowledged that the
Respondent was classified as a training category III club within UEFA, i.e. EUR 30,000,
when the player was registered with the latter.
5.
As such, the Claimant held it should receive EUR 41,095.89, being the amount of training
compensation it is entitled for having educated and trained the player during 500 days
during the years of his 20th and 21st birthdays.
6.
On 7 February 2023, the FIFA general secretariat submitted a proposal to the parties
suggesting that the Respondent should pay to the Claimant the sum of EUR 39,780.82
as training compensation plus 5% interest per annum as from 30 September 2022 until
the date of effective payment.
7.
The Respondent rejected the proposal.
8.
The Respondent held that it was a category IV club when registering the player and that
no training compensation should be paid in accordance with art. 2, par. 2. b) of Annexe
4 FIFA RSTP.
9.
The Respondent provided as evidence a statement from the FSHF which stated that
for the 2022-2023 season will be considered as transfers from a club classified in Training
.
10.
In particular, the Respondent argues that It is possible that the AFA (FSHF) may have
communicated the categorization of its affiliated clubs via TMS only after the transfer of the
Player to the Respondent, despite FIFA Circular no. 1805 of 08.07.2022 setting the deadline
for national associations to communicate the training compensation categories of their
Page 4 of 11
REF TMS 12281
affiliated clubs by 31.07.2022.
In any case, it is clear that if any negligence of the AFA took
place, of which there is however no evidence, such circumstances may not be held against the
Respondent, which acted in full good faith when it signed the Player on 29.08.2022 under the
assumption that no training compensation would be owed .
11.
On 27 June 2023, the Claimant, in replica, argued that
III club
In fact, the category of the Respondent was only changed to UEFA category IV club
on 06 January 2023 .
II. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS
Applicable law:
Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (RSTP): July 2022
edition.
Procedural Rules Governing the Football Tribunal (Procedural Rules):
March 2023 edition.
Jurisdiction:
Yes, uncontested
Admissible:
Yes, uncontested
Decision:
1.
professional with the Respondent.
2.
In particular, the Claimant relied on the FSHF player passport of reference and held that
it trained the player as a professional, directly on loan from the former club, NK
Lokomotiva Kroaci, as from 31.01.2020 until 13.06.2021.
3.
According to art. 2 par. 1 lit. ii) of Annexe 4 of the RSTP, training compensation is due
when a professional is transferred between clubs of two different associations before
4.
In accordance with the information available on TMS, the player was transferred from
the former club to the Respondent on 30 August 2022, during his 22nd birthday.
5.
in casu, no training
compensation shall in principle be due to the Claimant.
Page 5 of 11
REF TMS 12281
6.
However, as established by the jurisprudence of the DRC, when a player registers with a
club affiliated to a different member association (i.e., the new club, in casu the
Respondent) from the one where he was previously registered (i.e., the former club, in
casu NK Lokomotiva Kroaci), any club(s) that may have had the player on loan from the
club (in casu the Claimant).
7.
with the former club did not interrupt the chain of entitlement of training compensation.
ation with the former
club up until his registration with the new club constitutes one timeframe, irrelevant of
any loan(s) that may have taken place during this period.
8.
As such, it is established that the Claimant shall be entitled to training compensation for
the period during which it had the player registered directly on loan from the former
club, NK Lokomotiva Kroaci.
9.
In view of the above, it is determined that the registration of the player with the
Respondent constituted a subsequent registration as a professional in the sense of the
RSTP, which occurred before the end of the calendar year of his 23rd birthday.
10.
In light of the above, the FIFA general secretariat issued a proposal suggesting that the
Respondent should pay to the Claimant the sum of EUR 39,780.82 as training
compensation for the 484 days of registration between 31 January 2020 and 15
September 2020, and from 2 October 2020 until 13 June 2021.
11.
The Respondent rejected the proposal of the FIFA general secretariat under the
argument that it was a UEFA category IV club when registering the player and that art. 2,
par. 2. b) Annexe 4 RSTP determines that no training compensation is due in that case.
12.
When the Respondent registered the player, i.e. on 30 August 2022, the training category
attributed to it by the FSHF on FIFA TMS was UEFA category III. Moreover, the player
passport issued by the FSHF on 19 January 2023 shows the Respondent as a UEFA
category III club.
13.
In January 2023, i.e. four months after the registration of the player, the FSHF modified
Page 6 of 11
REF TMS 12281
14.
In accordance with article 7 RSTP,
player passports is inextricably
linked to the training rewards regime.
15.
The official player passport, as issued and confirmed by the relevant member
association, will be considered by the DRC in the event of any dispute. Clubs must do
their due diligence before signing players and can only rely in good faith on player
passports issued by a member association as being an accurate representation of the
.
16.
T
available on TMS when registering the player, on 30 August
2022, and on the FSHF player passport, issued on 17 January 2023, was III.
17.
Before a similar situation, Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) determined on its award
2015/A/4060 that:
14. Based on the information available in the TMS, with regard to FIFA categorization in
at the time when the Player was registered with it.
97. First of all, the Sole Arbitrator believes that the Appellant is not legitimated to escape
from the application of training compensation on the ground that it relied on the
documentation available in the TMS at the moment when the transfer process was closed.
101. CAS jurisprudence confirms the evidentiary relevance of the player passport in the
general rule,
that the difference stakeholders from the football community are able to rely in good faith
102. As a consequence, any club wishing to register a new player has the responsibility to
exercise the required diligence and possibly refrain from completing the transfer process in
103. Therefore, the Sole Arbitrator finds that since it was the club that was interested in
registering the Player, the Appellant was the party who should rightfully bear the risk that
the information on the basis of which the transfer process was completed was not accurate
and adequate .
Page 7 of 11
REF TMS 12281
18.
In accordance with the information inserted by the FSHF into TMS, the Respondent is
UEFA category III club between 2 March 2009 and 16 January 2023.
19.
Moreover, art. 3, par. 2 of Annexe 4 RSTP determines that
training compensation is 30 days following the registration of the professional with the new
association . Because of that, the Respondent, having registered the player as a
professional on 30 August 2022, had until 29 September 2022 to pay training
compensation to the entitled clubs.
20.
On 29 September 2022, in accordance with the information inserted into TMS by the
FSHF, the Respondent was a UEFA category III club.
21.
Bearing all the above in mind, the Respondent is to be considered as a UEFA category III
club at the moment of the registration of the player.
22.
Therefore, training compensation is due to the Claimant in line with art. 2 par. 1 lit. ii)
and art. 3 par. 1 of Annexe 4 of the RSTP.
23.
Consequently, the player was registered with the Claimant, on loan from the former club
during 484 days of his 20th and 21st birthdays, i.e. during 320 days of the calendar year
th
birthday, and during 164 days
st
birthday.
24.
In accordance with art. 5 par. 2 of Annexe 4 of the 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, in casu, the
Claimant which had the player directly on loan from the former club.
25.
The Respondent being a training category III club within UEFA for the purposes of the
present matter, the amount to be taken into account in casu as training cost is EUR
30,000 per year.
26.
Consequently, the Claimant is entitled to training compensation of EUR 39,780.82 for the
484 days of training of the player during the calendar year of his 20th and 21st birthdays.
27.
Furthermore, the Claimant requested to be awarded 5% interest p.a. as of the due date
until the effective date of payment.
Page 8 of 11
REF TMS 12281
28.
, as well as the well-established
jurisprudence of the DRC with regard to interest, the Claimant is entitled to receive
interest of 5% p.a. over the amount payable as training compensation as of 31 days after
the registration of the player with it, i.e. as from 30 September 2022 until the date of
effective payment.
29.
In view of all the above, the claim of the Claimant is partially accepted, and the Claimant
is entitled to receive EUR 39,780.82 as training compensation plus 5% interest p.a. on
that amount as from 30 September 2022 until the date of effective payment.
30.
Art. 25 par. 2 of the Procedural Rules stipulates that costs in the maximum amount of
USD 25,000 are levied in connection with proceedings before the DRC of the Football
Tribunal relating to disputes regarding training compensation and the solidarity
the proceedings (art. 25 par. 5 of the Procedural Rules).
31.
Thus, the amount claimed by the Claimant, i.e., EUR 41,095.89, corresponds to an
amount lower than USD 49,999.99. Therefore, procedural costs levied in this respect are
fixed at USD 5,000 (cf. art. 2 of Annexe 1 to the Procedural Rules).
32.
According to art. 25 par. 5 of the Procedural Rules, the chamber will decide the amount
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.
33.
In view the specific circumstances of the case, procedural costs shall be set at USD 4,500.
34.
Given the outcome of the claim, the procedural costs shall be distributed as follows:
35.
-
the amount of USD 3,000 shall be paid by the Claimant; and
-
the amount of USD 1,500 shall be paid by the Respondent.
Art. 24bis RSTP is applicable to the matter at hand.
Page 9 of 11
REF TMS 12281
III. DECISION
1. The claim of the Claimant, Laçi, is partially accepted.
2. The Respondent, Dinamo City, has to pay to the Claimant the amount of EUR 39,780.82
as training compensation plus 5% interest p.a. as from 30 September 2022 until the date
of effective payment.
3. Any further claims of the Claimant are rejected.
4. Full payment (including all applicable interest) shall be made to the bank account
indicated in the enclosed Bank Account Registration Form.
5. 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.
6. The consequences shall only be enforced at the request of the Claimant in
accordance with article 24 paragraphs 7 and 8 and article 25 of the Regulations on the
Status and Transfer of Players.
7. The final costs of the proceedings in the amount of USD 4,500 are to be paid to FIFA
reference to case no. TMS 12281 (cf. note relating to the payment of the procedural costs
below) as follows:
-
the amount of USD 1,500 shall be paid by the Claimant; and
the amount of USD 3,000 shall be paid by the Respondent.
For the Football Tribunal:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
Page 10 of 11
REF TMS 12281
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