FK Sileks v. FK Sloga Leskovac

II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND — A. Background facts

3. Below is a summary of the relevant facts and allegations based on the Parties’ written submissions and evidence adduced. References to additional facts and allegations found in the Parties’ written submissions and evidence will be made, where relevant, in connection with the legal analysis that follows. While the Sole Arbitrator has considered all the facts, allegations, legal arguments, and evidence submitted by the Parties in the present proceedings, he refers in his Award only to the submissions and evidence he deems necessary to explain his reasoning.

B. D.’s background

4. The player D. (hereinafter the “Player”) is of Serbian nationality and was born in 1995.

5. According to the player passport issued by the FAS, the Player was registered as an amateur with:

• GFK Dubočica Leskovac between 23 August 2005 and 2 February 2011;

• FK Sloga Leskovac between 27 January 2011 and 1 August 2012;

• FK Jedinstvo Bošnjace between 12 August 2015 and 17 February 2016;

• FK Tabane 1970 between 17 February 2016 and 14 June 2016.

6. It is undisputed that the Player first turned professional, when he entered into an employment relationship and signed a contract to this effect with FK Sileks on 27 June 2016.

C. The Proceedings before the Single Judge of the sub-committee of the FIFA Dispute

Resolution Chamber

7. In April 2017, FK Tabane 1970, FK Sloga Leskovac, GFK Dubočica Leskovac and FK Jedinstvo Bošnjace (the “Training Clubs”) each filed a separate claim with FIFA against FK Sileks, requesting the payment of training compensation. In four distinct decisions, the same Single Judge of the sub-committee of the FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber (“FIFA Single Judge”) fully accepted the respective claims of the Training Clubs.

8. More specifically, on 7 April 2017, FK Sloga Leskovac filed a claim with FIFA against FK Sileks, requesting the payment of training compensation amounting to EUR 36,667, plus interest at a rate of 5% p.a. as from 24 September 2016. The case was recorded under TMS 1446/pam.

9. In spite of having been duly invited to do so, FK Sileks did not submit any reply before the FIFA Single Judge to the claim filed by FK Sloga Leskovac.

10. In a decision issued on 18 July 2017, the FIFA Single Judge awarded training compensation to FK Sloga Leskovac based upon the following considerations:

• the Player had signed his first professional contract with FK Sileks;

• the number of months that he considered the Player had been registered with FK Sloga Leskovac, i.e. from 27 January 2011 until 1 August 2012;

• the fact that FK Sileks is a category III club, under the terms of the applicable FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (“RSTP”);

• the parameters and indicative amounts reflected in Annex 4 of the RSTP.

11. Consequently, in his decision of 18 July 2017, the FIFA Single Judge ordered FK Sileks to pay:

• to FK Sloga Leskovac “within 30 days of the date of notification of this decision, the amount of EUR 36,667 plus 5% interest p.a. on said amount as of 24 September 2016 until the date of effective payment”;

• to FIFA “The final costs of the proceedings in the amount of CHF 5,000 (…) within 30 days as from the date of the notification of the present decision (...)”.

12. On 4 September 2017, the Parties were notified of the decision issued by the FIFA Single Judge (hereinafter the “Appealed Decision”).

13. The decisions in the cases opposing FK Sileks and FK Tabane 1970 (recorded under TMS 1474/pam), FK Sileks and GFK Dubočica Leskovac (recorded under TMS 1442/pam) as well as FK Sileks and FK Jedinstvo Bošnjace (recorded under TMS 1422/pam) were also issued on 18 July 2017, and the interested Parties were notified on 4 September 2017.

III. PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COURT OF ARBITRATION FOR SPORT

14. On 21 September 2017, FK Sileks lodged its Statement of Appeal, and its Appeal Brief with the CAS in accordance with Article R47 et seq. of the Code of Sports-related Arbitration (the “Code”). In these documents, FK Sileks included a request that the procedure be referred to a Sole Arbitrator.

15. It must be observed that, with the same Statement of Appeal and Appeal Brief, FK Sileks challenged the four decisions issued by the FIFA Single Judge, for the purpose of consolidating the four procedures initiated against the Training Clubs. Eventually, the CAS Court Office informed the Parties that a consolidation was not possible as the requirements of Article 52, para. 4, of the Code had not been met. As a consequence, the procedure initiated against FK Tabane was recorded under CAS 2017/A/5350, the procedure initiated against FK Sloga Leskovac was recorded under CAS 2017/A/5351, the procedure initiated against GFK Dubočica Leskovac was recorded under CAS 2017/A/5352 and the procedure initiated against FK Jedinstvo Bošnjace was recorded under CAS 2017/A/5353.

16. On 6 October 2017, the CAS Court Office acknowledged receipt of the Statement of Appeal and Appeal Brief of FK Sileks as well as of its payment of the CAS Court Office fee. It granted FK Sloga Leskovac a deadline of twenty days from receipt of the Appeal Brief to file its Answer. The CAS Court Office also invited:

• FK Sloga Leskovac to comment within five days on the request of FK Sileks to submit the present matter to a Sole Arbitrator;

• the Parties to state within three days whether they agreed to submit the present procedure to the same Panel/Sole Arbitrator as in the proceedings CAS 2017/A/5350, CAS

17. On 10 October 2017, FK Sileks expressly accepted that the present procedure and the the same Panel/Sole Arbitrator.

18. On 13 October 2017, FK Sloga Leskovac sent a document entitled “STATEMENT OF DEFENCE” to the CAS Court Office, which reads, inter alia, as follows (“Statement of Defence”):

“Hereby we wish to inform Court that we started with the procedings before FIFA - DRC because the board changed and the new administration did not know that someone from the old administration signed the Disclaimer of Training Compensation. We also wish to inform Court that we do not have money to continue with the procedings before CAS and use the opportunity to apologize to FK Sileks, if we have done any damage to them. in accordance with the above we acknowledge that the Appellant’s request has been established”.

19. On 19 October 2017, FK Sileks sent a letter to the CAS Court Office whereby it highlighted the fact that, with its Statement of Defence, FK Sloga Leskovac was accepting the “appeal in full as justified [and recognized] that it [was] not entitled on training compensation regarding the registration of the player”. In this document, FK Sileks also amended the requests for relief contained in its Statement of Appeal and Appeal Brief.

20. As FK Sloga Leskovac failed to provide its position on the request of FK Sileks for a Sole Arbitrator as well as on the submission of the present procedure to the same Panel/Sole referred to the President of the CAS Appeals Arbitration Division.

21. On 30 October 2017, the CAS Court Office advised the Parties that the President of the CAS Appeals Arbitration Division decided to submit the present matter to a Sole Arbitrator, who would also be appointed for the cases CAS 2017/A/5350, CAS 2017/A/5352 and CAS

22. On 6 November 2017, the CAS Court Office observed that FK Sloga Leskovac failed to submit an Answer (distinct from its Statement of Defence) within the given time limit and invited the Parties to state by 13 November 2017 whether their preference was for a hearing to be held in the present matter.

23. On 7 November 2017, FK Sileks confirmed to the CAS Court Office that it preferred for the matter to be decided solely on the basis of the Parties’ written submissions, whereas FK Sloga Leskovac failed to express its position with regards to a hearing.

24. On 24 November 2017, the CAS Court Office advised the Parties that the President of the CAS Appeals Arbitration Division appointed Mr Petros C. Mavroidis, Professor, Commugny, Switzerland, as Sole Arbitrator. Mr Patrick Grandjean was appointed and acted as ad hoc clerk.

25. On 13 December 2017, the CAS Court Office informed the Parties that the Sole Arbitrator considered himself to be sufficiently well informed to decide this matter without the need to hold a hearing.

26. On 28 December 2017, the CAS Court office sent the parties the Order of Procedure which was returned duly singed by FK Sileks on 29 December 2017. FK Sloga Leskovac did not return a duly signed copy of the said document within the prescribed deadline.

IV. SUBMISSIONS OF THE PARTIES — A. The Appellant

27. FK Sileks submitted the following requests for relief:

“- To accept and upheld the current appeal before the CAS in full. - Issue a new decision which will replace and set aside the challenged decisions case nr. TMS

1446/pam in which it would be stated that the claim of the Respondent is without grounds for claim and void, therefore the Appellant should be released from the obligation to pay the before awarded sum of money in the before mentioned FIFA challenged decision.

• The final amount of the costs, including the Court Office fee, the administrative costs of the CAS, the costs and fees of the Sole Arbitrator and a contribution to the expenses of the CAS, as well as the Appellant contribution towards the legal fees and other expenses incurred in connection with this proceeding in the fixed sum of EUR 7.200,00 : 4 = EUR 1.800,00 (divided equally to every of all 4 (four) Respondents) shall be bear by the Respondent.

• The Appellant is not liable to pay the procedural costs awarded against it in the Appealed Decisions”.

28. The submissions of FK Sileks, in essence, may be summarized as follows:

- Before signing the employment contract with the Player, FK Sileks made sure that no training compensation would be claimed. In this regard, it obtained from FK Sloga Leskovac a written statement, dated 14 June 2016, whereby it had waived all rights to claim training compensation.

- Under these circumstances, the proceedings initiated before FIFA came as a surprise to FK Sileks. FK Sloga Leskovac had manifestly acted, in its view, in bad faith.

- In view of the Statement of Defence sent by FK Sloga Leskovac to the CAS Court Office on 13 October 2017, “it is very easy and without any complexity to conclude that the Respondent acknowledges and accepts the Appellant’s appeal in full as justified with legal grounds and recognizes that it is not entitled on training compensation regarding the registration of the player D. for FK Sileks Kratovo on 27 June 2016. Therefore, there is no room to enter into further discussion about the Respondent’s claim for training compensation. This recognition and confession by the Respondent leads to the clear factual and legal situation about the case at hand”.

B. The Respondent

29. FK Sloga Leskovac did not file any submission other than the Statement of Defence sent to the CAS Court Office on 13 October 2017.