Berenguer Remiro

Decisionofthe Players’StatusChamber passedon5December2023 regardingacontractualdisputeconcerningtheplayerAlejandroBerenguerRemiro BY: LuisKANONNIKOFF(Paraguay) CLAIMANT: ClubAtléticoOsasuna,Spain RepresentedbyMrSantiagoNebotRodrigo&MrJosepF.VandellosAlamilla RESPONDENT: TorinoFC,Italy RepresentedbyLombardiAssociates I.Factsofthecase 1.On17July2017,theSpanishclub,CAOsasuna(hereinafter:theClaimantorOsasuna)andtheItalianclub,TorinoFC(hereinafter:theRespondentorTorino)concludedanagreementforthepermanenttransferoftheplayer,AlejandroBerenguerRemiro(hereinafter:thePlayer),fromtheClaimanttotheRespondent,accordingtowhichthelatterundertook,interalia,topayatransferfeeofEUR5,500,000(hereinafter:theAgreement). 2.Accordingtoclause2.4oftheagreement,"IfTorinotransfersthePlayertoAthleticClubdeBilbaointhefuture,TorinoshallpayOsasuna€1'500'000(Euroonemillionfivehundredthousand)aspenalty,within60daysoftherelevantITCbeingreleased." 3.On10August2021,followingaClaimfromOsasunaanditssubsequentproceedings,theSingleJudgeofthePlayer’sStatusCommittee(PSC)decideduponthefollowinginthematter21-00219: “1.TheclaimoftheClaimant,CAOsasuna,ispartiallyaccepted. 2.TheRespondent,TorinoFC,hastopaytotheClaimanttheamountofEUR1,500,000.(…) 4.AnyfurtherclaimsoftheClaimantarerejected” 5.On28February2023,theCourtofArbitrationforSport(CAS)confirmedthedecisionofthePSC. 6.On28March2023,theRespondentpaidtheprincipalamountdueasperthedecisionofthePSC. 7.On17April2023,theClaimantsentadefaultnotice,requestingthepaymentofstatutoryinterestfrom9September2021(i.e.thedatewhenFIFAcommunicatedthegroundsoftheFIFADecision)to28March2023(i.e.thedatewhentheRespondentpaidtheprincipalamount). 8.On21April2023,theRespondentrepliedbyindicatingthatitwillnotpayanyinterests.Inparticular,theRespondentunderlinedthat,inthedecision21-00219,theSingleJudgeunambiguouslystatedthefollowing: “…theSingleJudge[ofthePlayers’StatusChamber]decidedthat,inaccordancewiththelong-standingjurisprudenceoftheDisputeResolutionChamberandthePlayers’StatusCommittee,nointerestisgrantedforthecontractualpenalty”(cf.FIFADecision,par.40).” II.ProceedingsbeforeFIFA 9.On08September2023,ClubAtléticoOsasunalodgedaclaimbeforetheFIFAFootballTribunalfor“statutoryinterestasperarticle104oftheSwissCodeofObligations”,which“correspondstotheinterestsrunningfromthedateoftheFIFADecisionuntilthe confirmationofthesamedecisionbyCAS. 10.Inthisrespect,theClaimantrequestedthepaymentofEUR116,301.37net 11.Initsreply,TorinochallengedFIFA'sjurisdictioninthematter,assertingthattheclaimfallsoutsidethescopeofFIFARegulationsontheStatusandTransferofPlayers. 12.TorinoarguedthatthedisputeconcernstheapplicabilityofstatutoryinterestunderSwisslawtoapaymentalreadymade,whichisbeyondFIFA'sregulatoryscope. 13.TheRespondentconsideredthat,iftheFIFATribunaldeclaresitselfcompetent,thecurrentclaimshouldbedeclaredinadmissiblebecausetheissuewasalreadydecidedinapreviousFIFADecision 14.Inhisreplica,theClaimantexpresseditssurpriseastotheRespondent'sjurisdictionalchallenge,assertingthatFIFAhashistoricallyadjudicatedoninterestissuesunderSwisslaw. 15.TheClaimantexplainedthatFIFAbodieshaveconsistentlyawardedinterestunderSwisslawdespitenodirectprovisioninFIFARegulations. 16.TheClaimantarguedthatnoresiudicataappearsinthismatter,sinceitconcernsstatutoryinterestfromthelatepaymentconfirmedbytheFIFADecisionandCASaward. 17.Initsduplica,theRespondentinsistedinhispreviousposition. 18.TheRespondentalsopointedoutthattheClaimantdidnotaddresshiscommentsto p.375oftheCommentarytotheRegulations,accordingtowhich,“Besidesdisputesbetweenclubsrelatingtotrainingcompensationandthesolidaritymechanism,FIFAisalsocompetenttohearotherdisputesarisingbetweenclubsaffiliatedtodifferentmemberassociations.Onceagain,theinternationaldimensionisthekeyelementindeterminingjurisdiction.ThedisputeconcernedmustalsofallwithinthegeneralscopeoftheRegulationsforFIFAtohearit.Inpractice,thismeansthedisputemustberelatedtointernationaltransfers.” 19.TheRespondentarguedthattheclaimatthecruxofthepresentproceedingswasalreadydecidedbytheFIFADecision. 20.TheRespondentconsideredthatthereisnoreasonwhatsoeverwhyinterestshouldapplyasfromthedayofnotificationofthereasoningoftheFIFADecisionandtheClaimantdidnoteventrytoprovideanexplanationforsucharbitraryposition. III.ConsiderationsofthePlayers’StatusChamber a.Competenceandapplicablelegalframework 1.Firstofall,theSingleJudgeofthePlayers’StatusChamber(hereinafteralsoreferredtoasPSCortheJudge)analysedwhetheritwascompetenttodealwiththecaseathand.Inthisrespect,ittooknotethatthepresentmatterwaspresentedtoFIFAon8September2023andsubmittedfordecisionon5December2023.Takingintoaccountthewordingofart. 34oftheMay2023editionoftheProceduralRulesGoverningtheFootballTribunal(hereinafter:theProceduralRules),theaforementionededitionoftheProceduralRulesisapplicabletothematterathand. 2.Subsequently,theSingleJudgereferredtoart.2par.1oftheProceduralRulesandobservedthatinaccordancewithart.23par.1incombinationwithart.22lit.g)oftheRegulationsontheStatusandTransferofPlayersOctober2022edit