Training Compensation
Texto da decisão
REF TMS 13719
Decision of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed on 18 January 2024
regarding training compensation for the
player Sertan YILMAZ
BY:
Mr. Clifford Hendel (USA), Single Judge of the Dispute Resolution
Chamber of the Football Tribunal
CLAIMANT:
FC Aarau, Switzerland
RESPONDENT:
TÜMOSAN KONYASPOR, Türkiye
Page 2 of 10
REF TMS 13719
I. FACTS OF THE CASE
Player:
Sertan YILMAZ
Date of birth:
14 January 2004
Player passport (s):
- issued by the Schweizerischer Fussballverband (SFV/ASF):
Year
2018
Birthday Club(s)
th
14
Grasshopper Club
Registration dates
Status
14/02/18
07/08/18
Amateur
Zurich
th
FC Dietikon
08/08/18
31/12/18
Amateur
th
15
FC Dietikon
01/01/19
14/02/19
Amateur
15th
Grasshopper Club
15/02/19
21/02/19
Amateur
14
2019
Zurich
th
FC Baden 1897
22/02/19
10/07/19
Amateur
th
FC Aarau
11/07/19
31/12/19
Amateur
th
FC Aarau
01/01/20
31/12/20
Amateur
th
FC Aarau
01/01/21
18/08/21
Amateur
th
17
SC Shoftland
19/08/21
31/12/21
Amateur
18th
SC Shoftland
01/01/22
07/09/22
Amateur
TUMOSAN KONYASPOR
08/09/22
31/12/22
Professional
15
15
2020
2021
2022
16
17
th
18
Date of registration: on 8 September 2022 with TUMOSAN KONYASPOR (Türkiye)
Claimant club:
FC Aarau (Switzerland)
Respondent club: TUMOSAN KONYASPOR (Türkiye)
UEFA, category II (EUR 60,000 per year)
Claim and Response:
1.
On 25 November 2023, the Claimant lodged the present claim and requested
EUR 102,575.34 as training compensation for the first registration of the player as a
professional with the Respondent plus 5% interest p.a. as of the due date, until the date
of effective payment.
Page 3 of 10
REF TMS 13719
2.
The Claimant
as an amateur for:
a. 174 days of the calendar year of his 15th birthday, between 11 July 2019 and 31
December 2019;
b. the full year of his 16th birthday, i.e. 2020; and
c. 230 days of the calendar year of his 17th birthday, from 1 January 2021 until 18
August 2021.
3.
To reach the abovementioned amount, the Claimant, considering the Respondent a
UEFA category II club, multiplied pro rata the registration period of the player by the
training costs of UEFA category VI clubs for the calendar year of his 15 birthday, and by
the training costs of UEFA category II clubs for the calendar years of his 16th and 17th
birthdays, in accordance with Annexe 4 of the FIFA Regulations on the Status and
Transfer of Players (RSTP).
4.
On 11 January 2024, the Respondent argued it that the Claimant waived its training
compensation entitlement via an agreement celebrated and signed between the two on
21 February 2023.
5.
The Respondent presented the agreement as evidence and highlighted from the content
of article 1 which states:
and right to claim training compensation mentioned in Art. 20 and Annexe 4 of the
with Konyaspor as a professional. Within this scope, Aarau hereby explicitly and
irrevocably accepts and declares that it will not request the payment of any amount
under any name from Konyaspor, including but not limited to the training
compensation and/or solidarity contribution amounts, except for the entitlement on
6.
The Respondent also emphasized article 3, that determines:
b. Notwithstanding, if the Player is not transferred to another club until 31 May
2026; if the employment contract signed between the Player and Konyaspor expires
naturally; or if the employment contract signed between the Player and Konyaspor
is terminated by the Player without just cause or by Konyaspor with just cause,
7.
8.
naturally on 31 May 2023 and that the Claimant waived its training compensation
entitlement.
On 17 January 2024, replying to the arguments of the Respondent, the Claimant
confirmed it entered in negotiations with it for the celebration of an agreement.
Page 4 of 10
REF TMS 13719
9.
The Claimant stated after discussing the draft of the agreement,
and sent the agreement, which was signed returned by the CEO of FC Aarau Sandro Burki via
DocuSign (see Appendix 4), with the request to complete the fully signed contract with the
missing signatures of Konyaspor and the player Sertan YILMAZ. So that the agreement can be
returned to FC Aarau and signed by a second authorized person (see Appendix 5 / extract
from the commercial register of FC Aarau, which mentions that the signature of CEO Sandro
Burki is only legally valid with a second signature of a representative of the board of Directors)
in the club, so that the agreement can became legally valid .
10.
Moreover, it emphasized that, contrary to what is shown in the agreement presented by
the Respondent, the player states he did not sign it. The Claimant provided as evidence
, in which the latter says
Sertan Yilmaz nor I (Aslan Sahin) have signed any agreement or any other document with
Konyaspor
11.
In conclusion, it highlighted that training compensation should be paid based on the
enforcement of the agreement celebrated with the Respondent, in accordance with
article 3.a of the agreement, which determines that if the Player is transferred on
temporary basis to another club until 31.05.2026 or if the employment contract signed
between the Player and Konyaspor is terminated by Konyaspor without just cause, by the
Player with just cause or mutually, Konyaspor shall pay 102.575,34
.
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
Decision:
1.
The claim of the Claimant is based on the first registration of the player as a professional
with the Respondent.
2.
It is undisputed that the player was registered for the first time as a professional on 8
September 2022 with Respondent.
Page 5 of 10
REF TMS 13719
3.
According to Annexe 4 RTSP, training compensation is in principle payable by the club
registering the player as professional for the first time to all the clubs where the player
was registered as from the beginning of the calendar year
th
birthday
st
up until the end of the calendar year of his 21 birthday.
4.
As per the player passport issued by the SFV/ASF, the player was registered with the
Claimant between the calendar years of his 15th and 17th birthdays.
5.
The Claimant would in principle be entitled to receive training compensation for the
training and education it provided to the player during the above timeframe.
6.
Nevertheless, the Respondent rejected the claim of the Claimant arguing that the latter
had waived its right to receive training compensation by means of an agreement
celebrated between the two on 23 February 2023.
7.
The Claimant confirms it signed the agreement, but it says that for it to be valid a second
signature from its part was needed. The Claimant provides as evidence for this purpose
its statute. In addition, the Claimant questions
8.
The Claimant alternatively asks for the agreement to be enforced against the
Respondent with the determination of the payment of an amount equal to the one
claimed as training compensation on this proceeding.
9.
In this context, we the content of art. 22 par. 1 lit. d) and e) in relation with art. 23 par. 1
of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players, determine that the Dispute
Resolution Chamber is competent to hear disputes related to training compensation and
solidarity mechanism between clubs, whereas, in case of a dispute between clubs
belonging to different associations related to the execution of an agreement, the
with art. 23 par. 2 of the cited Regulations).
10.
In this respect, all claims related to training compensation and to the solidarity
mechanism must be submitted and managed through TMS (cf. Art. 27, par. 1 of the
based on
Status Chamber as provided for in chapter III of the Procedural Rules.
11.
inadmissible.
Page 6 of 10
REF TMS 13719
12.
As per the jurisprudence of the DRC, the validity of a waiver in the context of the
entitlement to receive training compensation is subject to a clear and unequivocal
declaration by the party concerned and requires a clear language which reflects such
party
13.
In other words, the above jurisprudence requires a document:
a. Containing a clear and unequivocal renouncement to training compensation;
and
b. Issued by the party concerned by such renouncement.
14.
The alleged waiver stipulates that no training compensation is required for the player of
reference.
15.
As such, the first prerequisite of a valid waiver is met, i.e. a clear and unequivocal
renouncement to training compensation.
16.
As to the issuance of the waiver, the Claimant is arguing that in accordance with the
commercial register of FC Aarau,
the signature of CEO Sandro Burki is only legally valid
. In other words, it says
that the agreement would only be valid if it contained two signatures of its
representatives.
17.
However, the Claimant does
had been signed by one of its officials.
18.
Thus, it is established that the waiver was signed by a club official of the Claimant.
19.
In view of the above, the alleged waiver shall, in principle, be considered as a valid waiver.
20.
However, the Claimant argues that for the waiver to be valid, it should have been signed
by two of its representatives.
21.
As previously established, the Respondent,received the agreement signed by the
Claimant and containing the waiver of training compensation.
22.
The CEO of a club, who is the person signing for the Claimant, generally holds a highly
of importance. One could expect that the board members of a club such as the Claimant
Page 7 of 10
REF TMS 13719
would discuss the waiving of training compensation for one of their promising young
players since this act may imply financial consequences for the club.
23.
The fact that an official representative of the Claimant produced a document which
he/she may have not been entitled to issue according to its own internal processes, such
as the alleged waiver, does not preclude the Claimant to assume the legal consequences
of such act.
24.
Based on all the above, it is determined that the Respondent had carried out its due
diligence and could legitimately expect that the Claimant would not seek training
compensation based on the representation made by
25.
Therefore, the second prerequisite of a valid waiver is met, i.e. a clear and unequivocal
renouncement to training compensation issued by the party concerned by such
renouncement.
26.
In light of the above, the claim of the Claimant is rejected.
27.
According to art. 25 par. 2 of the Procedural Rules, procedural costs are payable for
disputes between clubs regarding the payment of training rewards.
28.
The Claimant claimed the amount of EUR 102,575.34. Thus, the amount claimed by the
Claimant corresponds to an amount between USD 100,000.00 and USD 149,999.99.
29.
Therefore, procedural costs levied in this respect are fixed at USD 15,000 (cf. art. 2 of
Annexe 1 to the Procedural Rules).
30.
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.
31.
In view the specific circumstances of the case, procedural costs shall be set at USD
15,000.
32.
In view of the outcome of the claim, said costs shall be borne by the Claimant in full.
33.
Art. 24bis RSTP is applicable to the matter at hand.
Page 8 of 10
REF TMS 13719
III. DECISION
1. The claim of the Claimant, FC Aarau is rejected.
2. The final costs of the proceedings in the amount of USD 15,000 are to be paid by
the Claimant to FIFA reference to case no. TMS 13719 (cf. note relating to the payment
of the procedural costs below).
For the Football Tribunal:
Emilio García Silvero
Chief Legal & Compliance Officer
Page 9 of 10
REF TMS 13719
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 10 of 10