Training Compensation
Texto da decisão
Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 8 June 2007,
in the following composition:
Slim Aloulou (Tunisia), Chairman
Philippe Diallo (France), Member
Zola Majavu (South Africa), Member
Theo van Seggelen (Netherlands), Member
John Didulica (Australia), Member
on the claim presented by the club,
X, XX
as ”Claimant”
against the club,
Y, YY
as “Respondent”
regarding a training compensation dispute related to the
transfer of the player ZZ
./…
I.
Facts of the case
1.
According to the information provided by the Football Federation of XX, the
XXian player ZZ, born on 12 July 1985, was registered as an amateur with X
(hereinafter: the Claimant), from the season 1997 until the season 2003/2004.
2.
Moreover, according to a written statement, without bearing a date, issued by Mrs
T, the president of X, she confirms that the player ZZ was loaned to O FC de for
the period of one year (as amateur).
3.
By means of its correspondence dated 3 April 2007, the Claimant confirmed that
the player was loaned to the club O FC on 14 February 2001 until 31 December
2001 for the season 2001/2002 and to the club C for the seasons 2002/2003 and
2003/2004 (as an amateur).
4.
On 2 April 2004, the player in question signed an employment contract with the
YYn club, Y (hereinafter: the Respondent), for the term of one year. The relevant
International Transfer Certificate for the player ZZ was issued by the Football
Federation of XX on 19 June 2004.
5.
On 10 August 2004, the Claimant filed its claim before FIFA against the
Respondent and requested the payment of training compensation for the seasons
1997 until 2003/2004 from the Respondent. According to the Football Federation
of XX, its member club, the Claimant, is classified in as a Category 2 club.
6.
The Football Association of YY, on behalf of the Respondent, informed on 15 July
2005 that its member club is one of the clubs in NAN and which has been
damaged by the Tsunami on. Its member club, the Respondent, lost several players
due to the mentioned disaster. Therefore, it requested that the Players’ Status
Committee considers this force majeur situation which is why the Respondent is
not in a position to comply with the claim of the Claimant.
7.
The Claimant replied to the argument of the Football Association of YY on behalf
of the Respondent that the player’s registration with the latter occurred in
May/June 2004, whereas the Tsunami happened on 26 December 2004.
Consequently, the Respondent, in accordance with the applicable FIFA
Regulations, had one month time after the player’s registration at the Football
Association of YY to proceed with the payment of the training compensation.
Therefore, such argument of the Respondent cannot be taken into consideration.
8.
On 14 September 2006, the Football Association of YY on behalf of the
Respondent explained that the employment contract signed between the player
ZZ and its member club, the Respondent, did not contain any indications that
Training Compensation for the player ZZ
(Club X, XX / Club Y, Indonesia)
2
training compensation would be payable to the Claimant. Therefore, it is of the
opinion that the claim of the Claimant is to be considered unfounded. Moreover,
the Claimant specified that the player left the club without its authorization and
before the expiry of the employment contract. Moreover, it requested again that
the circumstances with regard to what happened in Aceh, where the Respondent
is located, have to be considered.
II.
Considerations of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
First of all, the Chamber analysed whether it was competent to deal with the
matter at stake. In this respect, it referred to art. 18 par. 2 and 3 of the Rules
Governing the Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute
Resolution Chamber. The present matter was submitted to FIFA on 10 August
2004, as a consequence the Chamber concluded that the previous Procedural Rules
(edition 2001) on matters pending before the decision making bodies of FIFA are
applicable to the matter at hand.
2.
With regard to the competence of the Chamber, art. 42 par. 1 lit. (b) (iv) of the
FIFA Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2001) establishes
that disputes concerning training compensation will be decided by the Dispute
Resolution Chamber.
3.
As a consequence, the Dispute Resolution Chamber is the competent body to
decide on the present litigation concerning the training compensation claimed by
the Claimant for the training and education of the player ZZ.
4.
Subsequently, the members of the Chamber analyzed which edition of the
Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players should be applicable as to the
substance of the matter. In this respect, the Chamber referred to art. 26 par. 1 and
2 of the Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2005) in the
modified version in accordance with the FIFA circular no. 995 dated 23 September
2005. Furthermore, it acknowledged that the player had been registered for Y in
June 2004. Equally the Chamber took note that the claim was lodged at FIFA on 10
August 2004. In view of the aforementioned, the Chamber concluded that the
former FIFA Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players (edition 2001,
hereinafter: the Regulations) are applicable to the case at hand as to the
substance.
5.
In continuation, and entering into the substance of the matter, the members of
the Chamber exposed that, as established in Chapter VII of the Regulations,
training compensation for a player’s training and education is payable by the new
Training Compensation for the player ZZ
(Club X, XX / Club Y, Indonesia)
3
club either when the player signs his first contract as a non-amateur or each time a
non-amateur player changes from one club to another up to the time his training
and education is complete, which, as a general rule, occurs when the player
reaches 23 years of age (cf. art. 14 and 15 of the Regulations).
6.
In this respect, the members of the Chamber started by acknowledging the
Claimant’s claim for training compensation based on the years it trained and
educated the player in question. To this end, the members of the Chamber took
note of the confirmation from the Football Federation of XX according to which
the player in question was registered with the Claimant always as an amateur as
from the season 1997 until the season 2003/2004.
7.
Furthermore, the Chamber affirmed that it is undisputed and both parties agreed
that the player afterwards signed his first non amateur contract with the
Respondent.
8.
At this stage, the deciding body deemed it appropriate to analyze the statements
of the Respondent based on which it refused to pay to the Claimant the relevant
training compensation.
9.
In particular, the members of the Chamber analyzed the Football Association of
YY’s statement, on behalf of the Respondent, expressing that the latter is located
in the area that was damaged by the Tsunami on 26 December 2004. Furthermore,
it was submitted that the relevant employment contract signed by and between
the player and the Respondent did not contain any indications that training
compensation would be due. Moreover, the Chamber noted that according to the
Respondent, the player in question left before the expiry of the contract they
signed and, most notably, without its authorization.
10.
In view of the above-mentioned arguments raised by the Respondent for not
having to pay training compensation to the Claimant, the Chamber concluded that
the justifications of the Respondent have no legal grounds and are in fact not
relevant for this dispute and therefore they do not affect the Claimant’s right to
receive training compensation for the training and education provided to the
player ZZ.
11.
In addition to that, the Chamber deemed it important to particularly emphasize
that, without intending to anyhow underestimate the circumstances occurred in
the relevant flood-affected areas, the obligation of the Respondent to pay
training compensation to the Claimant became due at the latest within 30 days
following the signature of the contract (on 2 April 2004, cf. art. 9 par. 1 of the
Regulations governing the Application of the Regulations for the Status and
Training Compensation for the player ZZ
(Club X, XX / Club Y, Indonesia)
4
Transfer of Players; hereinafter: Application Regulations) between the player in
question and the Respondent, thus prior to the disastrous events occurred in YY
and other areas concerned. Besides, the Chamber was of the opinion that the
terrible catastrophe which happened in the relevant region where the Respondent
is located should not lead to disadvantages and a loss of the pertinent rights of
the Claimant.
12.
Taking into account all of the above, the Dispute Resolution Chamber established
the Respondent’s obligation to compensate the Claimant and went on to
deliberate on the proper calculation of this compensation, affirming that the
amount shall be calculated in accordance with the parameters provided by the
Regulations.
13.
In this respect, first of all, it was recalled that, outside the EU/EEA, compensation
for training is based on the training and education costs of the country of the new
club while taking the category of the club which has effectively trained the player
in accordance with FIFA Circular No. 826, dated 31 October 2002.
14.
In accordance with art. 5 par. 1 of the Application Regulation, the training period
to be taken into account for the calculation of the training compensation starts at
the beginning of the season of the player’s 12th birthday and finishes at the end of
the season of the player’s 21st birthday.
15.
In this respect, the Chamber emphasised that in the present case the period to be
taken into account is from the season 1997/1998 until the season 2006/2007.
Moreover, the Chamber acknowledged that, according to the relevant player
passport, the player ZZ, born on 12 July 1985, was registered with the Claimant as
an amateur from the season 1997 until the season 2003/2004.
16.
In continuation, the Chamber turned to the question as to whether training
compensation is due to the Claimant for the period of time during which the
player ZZ was transferred on a loan basis to other clubs, in casu O FC and C.
17.
In this respect, the members referred to the well-established jurisprudence of the
Dispute Resolution Chamber, which has been confirmed by the Court of
Arbitration for Sport (CAS), according to which a club is only entitled to receive
training compensation for the period of time during which a player has in fact
been trained by the club claiming payment of such compensation. This implies that
no training compensation shall be due to the Claimant for the period of time
during which the player ZZ was transferred on a loan basis to the aforementioned
two clubs.
Training Compensation for the player ZZ
(Club X, XX / Club Y, Indonesia)
5
18.
Taking into consideration the above, the request for training compensation put
forward by the Claimant with respect to the period of time during which the
player in question was registered on a loan basis with the aforementioned two
clubs has to be dismissed.
19.
Moreover, in accordance with art. 7 par. 2 of the Application Regulations, the
amount payable for the training of players aged 12 to 15 shall be based on the
training and education costs for category 4. In this regard, the Chamber
emphasized that, in accordance with its long standing and well established
jurisprudence, category 4 is applicable for three sportive seasons. Within the
Football Confederation () that is an indicative amount of USD 2,000 per year of
training.
20.
In light of the above, the Chamber stated that the training period to be taken into
consideration in the matter at stake started with the sportive season 1998/1999
when the player was between the ages of 12 and 13 until 14 February 2001,
season 2000/2001 when the player was loaned to the club O FC . Furthermore, the
Chamber acknowledged that the player had also been trained by the Claimant
during half of the season 2001/2002, before he was loaned to the Club C.
21.
In light of all of the above, the Chamber decided that the Claimant is entitled to
training compensation for the period of 2 seasons (season 1998/1999 and
1999/2000 while taking into consideration an indicative amount of USD 2,000 per
year), seven months in the season 2000/2001 (considering as well an indicative
amount of USD 2,000) and half of the season 2001/2002 while considering an
indicative amount of USD 40,000.
22.
The Dispute Resolution Chamber concluded that the Respondent must pay to the
Claimant the amount of USD 25,166 for the training of the player ZZ.
III.
Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber
1.
The claim lodged by the Claimant, X, is partially accepted.
2.
The Respondent, Y, shall pay the amount of USD 25,166 to the Claimant, X, within
30 days following the date of the communication of the present decision.
3.
Any further claims lodged by the Claimant, X, are rejected.
4.
In the event that the above-mentioned amount is not paid within the stated
deadline, an interest rate of 5% per year will apply and the present matter shall
be submitted to FIFA’s Disciplinary Committee, so that the necessary disciplinary
sanctions may be imposed.
Training Compensation for the player ZZ
(Club X, XX / Club Y, Indonesia)
6
5.
The Claimant, X, is instructed to inform the Respondent, Y, directly and
immediately of the account number to which the remittance is to be made and to
notify the Dispute Resolution Chamber of every payment received.
6.
According to art. 61 par. 1 of the FIFA Statutes, this decision may be appealed
against before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The statement of appeal
must be sent to the CAS directly within 21 days of receipt of notification of this
decision and shall contain all the elements in accordance with point 2 of the
directives issued by the CAS, a copy of which we enclose hereto. Within another 10
days following the expiry of the time limit for filing the statement of appeal, the
appellant shall file a brief stating the facts and legal arguments giving rise to the
appeal with the CAS (cf. point 4 of the directives).
The full address and contact numbers of the CAS are the following:
Avenue de Beaumont 2
CH-1012 Lausanne /Switzerland
Tel: +41 21 613 50 00
Fax: +41 21 613 50 01
e-mail: [email protected]
www.tas-cas.org
For the Dispute Resolution Chamber:
Jérôme Valcke
General Secretary
Encl.
CAS directives
Training Compensation for the player ZZ
(Club X, XX / Club Y, Indonesia)
7