Training Compensation
Texto da decisão
REF TMS 5917
Decision of the
DRC Judge
passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 30 June 2020,
regarding training compensation for the player Kubilay Turk Yilmaz
BY:
Geoff Thom ps on (England), Single Judge of the sub-committee of
the Dispute Resolution Chamber
CLAIMANT:
FC Spartak Trnava, Slovakia
RESPONDENT:
Yeni Malatyaspor, Turkey
Page 2 of 8
REF TMS 5917
I. FACTS OF THE CASE
1.
According to the player passport issued by the Slovenský futbalový zväz (hereinafter: SFZ),
the player, Kubilay Turk Yilmaz, (hereinafter: the player), born on 9 July 1996, was registered
with its affiliated club including FC Spartak Trnava (hereinafter: the Claimant), as from 15
February 2017 until 15 January 2020 as an amateur.
2.
Pursuant to the information provided by the SFZ, the sporting seasons in Slovakia starts on 1
July of the current and ends on 30 June of the following year.
3.
According to the information contained in the Transfer Matching System (TMS), on 15 January
2020, the player was registered with the Turkish club, Yeni Malatyaspor, as a professional,
after a transfer from the Claimant “out of contract – free of payment”.
4.
On 29 April 2020, the Claimant lodged a claim in front of FIFA requesting training
compensation on the ground of the player’s first registration as a professional before the end
of the season of the player’s 23rd birthday. In particular, the Claimant requested EUR 82,192,
plus 5% interest p.a. as from 15 February 2020.
5.
In its reply, the Respondent requested to dismiss the Claimant’s claim. In particular, according
to the Respondent, the player was already a professional player when registered with the
Claimant.
6.
Moreover, the Respondent highlighted that the player turned 24 years old on 9 July 2019 and
that the “Fortuna League 2019-2020” had started only on 20 July 2020, which led the
Respondent to conclude that the Claimant is not entitled to receive training compensation.
II. CONSIDERATIONS OF THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION CHAMBER
1.
First of all, the Single Judge of the sub-committee of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
(hereinafter: the Single Judge) analysed whether he was competent to deal with the case at
hand. In this respect, he took note that the present matter was submitted to FIFA on 29 April
2020. Taking into account the wording of art. 21 of the 2019 edition of the Rules Governing the
Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber
(hereinafter: the Procedural Rules), the aforementioned edition of the Procedural Rules is
applicable to the matter at hand (cf. article 21 of the Procedural Rules).
2.
Subsequently, the Single Judge referred to art. 3 of the Procedural Rules, which states that
the Dispute Resolution Chamber shall examine its jurisdiction in light of arts. 22 to 24 of the
Regulations (June 2020 edition). In accordance with art. 3 of Annexe 6 in conjunction with art.
24 par. 3 and art. 22 lit. d) of the Regulations, the Single Judge is competent to decide on the
present dispute relating to training compensation between clubs belonging to different
associations handled through TMS.
Page 3 of 8
REF TMS 5917
3.
Furthermore, and taking into consideration that the player was registered with the Respondent
on 15 January 2020, the Single Judge analysed which regulations should be applicable as to
the substance of the matter. In this respect, he confirmed that, in accordance with art. 26 par.
1 and 2 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players, the January 2020 edition of
the Regulations is applicable to the matter at hand as to the substance.
4.
The competence of the Single Judge and the applicable regulations having been established,
the Single Judge entered into the substance of the matter. The Single Judge started by
acknowledging the above-mentioned facts of the case as well as the documentation on file.
However, the Single Judge emphasized that in the following considerations he will refer only
to the facts, arguments and documentary evidence which he considered pertinent for the
assessment of the matter at hand. In particular, the Single Judge recalled that, in accordance
with art. 6 par. 3 of Annexe 3 of the Regulations, FIFA may use, within the scope of proceedings
pertaining to the application of the Regulations, any documentation or evidence generated or
contained in the TMS.
5.
In this context, the Single Judge proceeded with an analysis of the circumstances surrounding
the present matter, the parties’ arguments as well the documentation on file, bearing in mind
art. 12 par. 3 of the Procedural Rules, in accordance with which any party claiming a right on
the basis of an alleged fact shall carry the burden of proof.
6.
First of all, the Single Judge recalled that, in accordance with the player’s passport issued by
the SFZ, the player, born on 9 July 1996, was registered with the Claimant as from 15 February
2017 until 15 January 2020 as an amateur and he was registered with the Respondent on 15
January 2020, for the first time as a professional.
7.
In continuation, the Single Judge took note that the Claimant requested the payment of the
training compensation from the Respondent in view of the first registration of the player as a
professional with the Respondent before the end of the season of his 23rd birthday. In
particular, the Single Judge took note that the Claimant requested the amount of EUR 82,192
plus interest.
8.
The Single Judge further observed the argumentation of the Respondent, which held that the
player, contrary to the information contained in the player’s passport issued by the SFZ, was
already a professional player when registered with the Claimant.
9.
In this regard, the Single Judge examined the documentation on file and noted that the
Respondent submitted extracts from the internet showing that the player had appearances in
the Claimant’s Europa League campaign as well as an untranslated document, allegedly the
player’s professional contract with the Claimant.
Page 4 of 8
REF TMS 5917
10.
At this point, the Single Judge recalled that, in accordance with art. 9 par. 1 lit. e) of the
Procedural Rules, all documentation provided in the context of a dispute in front of FIFA should
be presented in the original version and, if applicable, translated into one of the official FIFA
languages (English, French, Spanish and German). Bearing in mind the wording of the
aforementioned provision, the Single Judge concluded that the untranslated document
presented by the Respondent could not be taken into account. Consequently, Single Judge
deemed that no substantial evidence was provided by the Respondent with regard to the
player’s alleged status as a professional player.
11.
On account of the above, and taking into account the information provided by the SFZ, the
Single Judge rejected the Respondent’s argument that the player was already a professional
player when registered with the Claimant.
12.
Subsequently, the Single Judge turned his attention to the second argument of the
Respondent, namely that the player turned 24 years old on 9 July 2019 and that the Slovakian
League had started only on 20 July 2020, which led the Respondent to conclude that the
Claimant is not entitled to receive training compensation.
13.
In this regard, the Single Judge emphasized that, according to the SFZ, the sporting season
sporting seasons in Slovakia starts each year on 1 July of the current and ends on 30 June of
the following year.
14.
Taking into account the above, the Single Judge concluded, that the player turned 23 on 9 July
2019 and therefore the season of his 23rd birthday started on 1 July 2019 and ended on 30
June 2020. Since the player was transferred to the Respondent on 15 January 2020, the Single
Judge concluded that such transfer occurred before the before the end of the season of the
player’s 23rd birthday.
15.
On account of the above, the Single Judge rejected the argument of the Respondent.
16.
Having paid particular attention to the arguments of the parties, the Single Judge, hereby
referring to the rules applicable to training compensation, stated that, as established in art. 20
of the Regulations in combination with art. 1 par. 1 and art. 2 par 1. of Annexe 4 of the
Regulations, training compensation is payable, as a general rule, for training incurred between
the ages of 12 and 21 when a player is registered for the first time as a professional before the
end of the season of the player’s 23rd birthday or when a professional is transferred between
clubs of two different associations before the end of the season of the player’s 23rd birthday.
17.
In continuation, the Single Judge observed that, based on the official documents at disposal,
it can be established that the player was registered with the Claimant before the end of the
season of his 21st birthday, i.e. as from 15 February 2017 until 30 June 2018 as an amateur.
Furthermore, the Single Judge noted that the player was registered for the first time as a
professional with the Respondent on 15 January 2020, i.e. before the end of the season of his
23rd birthday.
Page 5 of 8
REF TMS 5917
18.
In view of the foregoing, the Single Judge remarked that the Claimant is entitled to training
compensation.
19.
Turning its attention to the calculation of the training compensation, the Single Judge referred
to art. 3 par. 1 sent. 2 of Annexe 4 of the Regulations, which stipulates that the amount payable
is calculated on a pro rata basis according to the period of training that the player spent with
each club. Moreover, the Single Judge acknowledged that the seasons in Slovakia started
each year on 1 July of the current and ended on 30 June of the following year. As such, the
Single Judge concluded that the effective period of time to be considered in the matter at stake
corresponds to 136 days of the season of the player’s 20st birthday and 12 months of the
season of the player’s 21st birthday.
20.
Taking into consideration all the above, as well as the amount claimed by the Claimant, the
Single Judge decided that the Respondent is liable to pay the amount of EUR 82,192 to the
Claimant for the training and education of the player.
21.
Moreover, taking into consideration the Claimant’s request as well as art. 3 par. 2 of Annexe 4
of the Regulations, the Single Judge decided that the Respondent has to pay, in conformity
with its long standing practice, interest at 5% p.a. over the amount payable as training
compensation as of the 31st day of the registration of the player with the Respondent as a
professional, i.e. as of 15 February 2020 until the date of effective payment.
22.
Furthermore, taking into account the consideration under number II./3. above, the Single Judge
referred to par. 1 and 2 of art. 24bis of the Regulations, which stipulate that, with its decision,
the pertinent FIFA deciding body shall also rule on the consequences deriving from the failure
of the concerned party to pay the relevant amounts of outstanding remuneration and/or
compensation in due time.
23.
In this regard, the Single Judge pointed out that, against clubs, the consequence of the failure
to pay the relevant amounts in due time shall consist of a ban from registering any new players,
either nationally or internationally, up until the due amounts are paid and for the maximum
duration of three entire and consecutive registration periods.
24.
Therefore, bearing in mind the above, the Single Judge decided that, in the event that the
Respondent does not pay the amount due to the Claimant within 45 days as from the moment
in which the Claimant, following the notification of the present decision, communicates the
relevant bank details to the Respondent, a ban from registering any new players, either
nationally or internationally, for the maximum duration of three entire and consecutive
registration periods shall become effective on the Respondent in accordance with art. 24bis
par. 2 and 4 of the Regulations.
25.
Finally, the Single Judge recalled that the above-mentioned sanction will be lifted immediately
and prior to its complete serving upon payment of the due amounts, in accordance with art.
24bis par. 3 of the Regulations.
Page 6 of 8
REF TMS 5917
III.
DECISION OF THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION CHAMBER
1.
The claim of the Claimant, FC Spartak Trnava is accepted.
2.
The Respondent, Yeni Malatyaspor, has to pay to FC Spartak Trnava, the following amount:
EUR 82,192 as training compensation plus 5% interest p.a. as from 15 February 2020 until the
date of effective payment.
3.
The Claimant is directed to immediately and directly inform the Respondent of the relevant bank
account to which the Respondent must pay the due amount.
4.
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).
5.
In the event that the amount due, plus interest as established above is not paid by the Respondent
within 45 days, as from the notification by the Claimant of the relevant bank details to the
Respondent, the following consequences shall arise:
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. The aforementioned ban mentioned will be
lifted immediately and prior to its complete serving, once the due amount is paid.
(cf. art. 24bis of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players).
2. 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.
For the Dispute Resolution Chamber:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
Page 7 of 8
REF TMS 5917
NOTE RELATED TO THE APPEAL PROCEDURE:
According to article 58 par. 1 of the FIFA Statutes, this decision may be appealed against before the
Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) within 21 days of receipt of the notification of this decision.
NOTE RELATED TO THE 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 8 of 8