F.I.F.A. – Commissione per lo Status dei Calciatori (2011-2012) – controversie agenti di calciatori – ———- F.I.F.A. – Players’ Status Committee (2011-2012) – players’ and match agents disputes – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 24 April 2012, by Geoff Thompson (England) Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee, on the claim presented by the Players’ Agent J, as “Claimant” against the club K, as “Respondent” regarding a claim for commission I. Facts of the case

F.I.F.A. - Commissione per lo Status dei Calciatori (2011-2012) – controversie agenti di calciatori – ---------- F.I.F.A. - Players' Status Committee (2011-2012) – players’ and match agents disputes – official version by www.fifa.com – Decision of the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee passed in Zurich, Switzerland, on 24 April 2012, by Geoff Thompson (England) Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee, on the claim presented by the Players’ Agent J, as “Claimant” against the club K, as “Respondent” regarding a claim for commission I. Facts of the case 1. On 15 May 2008, the players’ agent J licensed by the Football Federation A (hereinafter: the Claimant) and the country T club K (hereinafter: the Respondent) concluded an exclusive representation agreement (hereinafter: the agreement), valid for 5 months as from 1 April 2008 until 1 September 2008 regarding the transfer of the player X (hereinafter: the player). 2. As stated in the agreement, the Claimant was “authorized to lead negotiation and to prepare contracts” but was “not allowed to sign any contract”. Furthermore, it was stated in art. 2 of the agreement that “if X signs an employment agreement for two years and club K receives the ITC” the Claimant was entitled to receive from the Respondent, as commission: EUR 25,000 on 15 July 2008, EUR 25,000 on 15 July 2009 and EUR 25,000 on 15 July 2009. 3. On 15 May 2008, the player signed an employment contract with the Respondent, valid as from 1 July 2008 until 30 June 2011. 4. On 16 March 2009, the Claimant lodged a claim in front of FIFA against the Respondent requesting from the latter the payment of EUR 25,000, corresponding to the first instalment that was due on 15 July 2008, for his work leading to the engagement of the player. 5. On 16 October 2009, the Claimant amended his claim by requesting from the Respondent the payment of EUR 50,000 that corresponded to the first and second instalments due on 15 July 2008 resp. on 15 July 2009. 6. In spite of having been asked to do so, the Respondent never responded to the claim lodged against it, although it was informed that, in absence of a reply, a decision would be taken on the basis of the information and evidence at disposal. II. Considerations of the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee 1. First of all, the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee analysed which procedural rules are applicable to the matter at hand. In this respect, he referred to art. 21 par. 2 and 3 of the Rules governing the procedures of the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber (edition 2008). The present matter was submitted to FIFA on 16 March 2009, thus after 1 July 2008. Therefore, the Single Judge concluded that the current edition of the Procedural Rules (edition 2008; hereinafter: the Procedural Rules) is applicable to the matter at hand. 2. Subsequently, the Single Judge analysed which edition of the FIFA Players’ Agent Regulations should be applicable. In this respect, he confirmed that in accordance with art. 39 par. 1 and 4 of the 2008 edition of the Players’ Agents Regulations, and considering that the present claim was lodged on 16 March 2009, the current edition of the Players’ Agents Regulations (edition 2008; hereinafter: the Regulations) is applicable to the matter at hand. 3. With regard to his competence, the Single Judge pointed out that in accordance with the provisions set out by the Regulations, FIFA has jurisdiction on matters relating to licensed players’ agents, i.e. on those individuals who hold a valid players’ agent licence issued by the relevant member Association. 4. The Single Judge continued his deliberations by indicating that the present matter concerns a dispute between a players’ agent licensed by the Football Federation A and a club, regarding an allegedly outstanding commission. 5. As a consequence, the Single Judge is the competent body to decide on the present matter which has an international dimension (cf. art. 30 par. 2 of the Regulations). 6. His competence and the applicable regulations having been established, the Single Judge entered into the substance of the matter. In doing so and first of all, the Single Judge observed that the Respondent had not submitted any comments in response to the claim lodged against it by the Claimant despite having been asked to do so by FIFA. Therefore, the Single Judge concluded that, in this way, the Respondent had renounced to its right of defence and, thus, it had to be assumed that it had accepted the allegations of the Claimant. 7. Hence and bearing in mind the aforementioned, the Single Judge referred to art. 9 par. 3 of the Procedural Rules and pointed out that in the present matter a decision shall be taken upon the basis of the documents on file, in other words upon the allegations and documents provided by the Claimant. 8. In this respect, the Single Judge acknowledged that, on 15 May 2008, the Claimant and the Respondent had concluded a representation agreement in connection with the transfer of the player according to which “if X [i.e. the player] signs an employment agreement for two years and club K receives the ITC” the Claimant was entitled to receive from the Respondent, as commission: EUR 25,000 on 15 July 2008, EUR 25,000 on 15 July 2009 and EUR 25,000 on 15 July 2009. Moreover, the Single Judge took note that, on the same date, the Respondent had concluded an employment contract with the player. 9. In continuation, the Single Judge observed that, in his claim to FIFA, the Claimant had requested the payment of the first and second instalments of his commission as stipulated in the agreement, arguing that although the player had signed an employment contract with the Respondent, the latter had failed to pay him the relevant amount. As to that, the Single Judge further recalled that said allegations of the Claimant had not been contested by the Respondent. 10. Bearing in mind the foregoing and in accordance with the basic legal principle of pacta sunt servanda, which in essence means that agreements must be respected by the parties in good faith, the Single Judge held that, based on the agreement concluded between the parties, the Respondent had agreed to inter alia pay to the Claimant EUR 25,000 on 15 July 2008 and EUR 25,000 on 15 July 2009. Furthermore and considering that the Respondent does not appear to have paid the amounts in question to the Claimant as well as taking into account that the prerequisites for the relevant payments stipulated in the agreement seemed to have been fulfilled, i.e. that the player signed an employment contract with the Respondent, the Single Judge ruled that the Claimant is entitled to receive from the Respondent EUR 50,000 as commission, corresponding to the first and second instalments due in accordance with the agreement. 11. As a consequence, the Single Judge concluded his deliberations on the present dispute by deciding that the Claimant’s claim is accepted, and therefore the Respondent must pay to the Claimant the amount of EUR 50,000. 12. Finally, the Single Judge referred to art. 25 par. 2 of the Regulations in combination with art. 18 par. 1 of the Procedural Rules, according to which in the proceedings before the Players’ Status Committee and the Single Judge, costs in the maximum amount of CHF 25,000 are levied. The costs are to be borne in consideration of the parties’ degree of success in the proceedings and are normally to be paid by the unsuccessful party. 13. In this respect, the Single Judge reiterated that the claim of the Claimant is accepted and that the Respondent is the party at fault. Therefore, the Single Judge decided that the Respondent has to bear the entire costs of the current proceedings in front of FIFA. 14. Furthermore and according to Annexe A of the Procedural Rules, the costs of the proceedings are to be levied on the basis of the amount in dispute. Consequently and taking into account the total amount at dispute in the present matter, the Single Judge concluded that the maximum amount of costs of the proceedings corresponds to CHF 10,000. 15. In conclusion, and considering that the case at hand was adjudicated by the Single Judge and not by the Players’ Status Committee in corpore and that the present case did not show particular factual difficulties or specific legal complexities, the Single Judge determined the costs of the current proceedings to the amount of CHF 8,000. 16. Consequently, the amount of CHF 8,000 has to be paid by the Respondent to cover the costs of the present proceedings. III. Decision of the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee 1. The claim of the Claimant, J, is accepted. 2. The Respondent, Club K, has to pay to the Claimant, J, the amount of EUR 50,000 within 30 days as from the date of notification of this decision. 3. If the aforementioned sum is not paid within the aforementioned deadline, an interest rate of 5% per year will apply as of the expiry of the fixed time limit and the present matter shall be submitted, upon request, to FIFA’s Disciplinary Committee for consideration and a formal decision. 4. The final costs of the proceedings in the amount of CHF 8,000 are to be paid by the Respondent, Club K, within 30 days as from the date of notification of the present decision as follows: 4.1 The amount of CHF 7,000 has to be paid to FIFA to the following bank account with reference to case nr.: UBS Zurich Account number 366.677.01U (FIFA Players’ Status) Clearing number 230 IBAN: CH27 0023 0230 3666 7701U SWIFT: UBSWCHZH80A 4.2 The amount of CHF 1,000 has to be paid to the Claimant, J. 5. The Claimant, J, is directed to inform the Respondent, Club K, immediately and directly of the account number to which the remittances under points 2 and 4.2 above are to be made and to notify the Players’ Status Committee of every payment received. Note relating to the motivated decision (legal remedy): According to art. 67 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: Court of Arbitration for Sport Avenue de Beaumont 2 1012 Lausanne Switzerland Tel: +41 21 613 50 00 Fax: +41 21 613 50 01 e-mail: info@tas-cas.org www.tas-cas.org For the Single Judge of the Players’ Status Committee Jérôme Valcke Secretary General Encl. CAS directives