AS Roma v. Sporting Clube de Portugal SAD

At a glance

Parties

A.S. Roma S.p.A (Italy) v. Sporting Clube de Portugal – Futebol, SAD (Portugal)

Case no.

CAS 2023/A/9371

Forum and rules

Court of Arbitration for Sport, appeal procedure under the CAS Code (2022 edition); appeal against a decision of the FIFA DRC

Treaty

None. FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (August 2021 edition), Article 20 and Annex 4, Article 6(3)

Tribunal

Manfred Nan (President), Jacopo Tognon, Benoît Pasquier

Sector

Football; training compensation

Outcome

Appeal dismissed and FIFA DRC decision of 9 November 2022 confirmed (award of 27 October 2023).

Amount

Claimed: EUR 159,865.48 in training compensation, plus 5% interest per year. Awarded: nothing. The DRC had ordered Roma to pay FIFA procedural costs of USD 16,000. The published award omits the CAS costs ruling.

The dispute

The Player, born on 1 January 2004, was registered with Roma as an amateur from 26 September 2014 to 9 January 2022. Under the Italian federation's internal rules (NOIF), he held "giovani di serie" status. In June 2021 he signed an employment contract with Sporting, and on 10 January 2022 he was registered there as a professional for the first time. He later moved to the Italian club Pescara. Roma claimed training compensation from Sporting under the FIFA RSTP. It argued that the giovani di serie bond, which it said ran until 30 June 2023, meant it did not need to offer the Player a contract. It also relied on its letter of 30 June 2021 as proof of a genuine interest in the Player, and said Sporting had exploited a loophole in the Italian registration system. Sporting answered that Article 6(3) of Annex 4 RSTP applies to transfers within the EU and that Italian rules are irrelevant. It added that Roma could have offered the Player a contract from age 16 but did not, and that the letter was only a standard notice.

Key holdings

1. The RSTP in force when the Player was registered with his new club governs the dispute: the August 2021 edition. Swiss law applies only to fill gaps. National regulations such as the NOIF in principle do not apply to an international training compensation dispute. ¶¶ 53–58
2. FIFA and CAS do not recognise giovani di serie status internationally. The status may stop rival Italian clubs from registering a player, but it did not stop Sporting or the Player from concluding a contract. Because the Player had no professional contract with Roma, he was an amateur. ¶¶ 69–72
3. Under Article 6(3) of Annex 4 RSTP, a former club within the EU/EEA is entitled to training compensation only if it offered the player a contract, or if it otherwise shows a genuine and bona fide interest in his services. Where nothing prevented the club from offering a contract, a restrictive approach applies. ¶¶ 73–77
4. Roma was not barred from offering a contract. Article 33(3) NOIF allows clubs to sign giovani di serie players to professional contracts from age 16, and a news article showed that Roma had offered a contract to a 17-year-old in the past. ¶¶ 81–84
5. The letter of 30 June 2021 did not prove a genuine interest. It only invited the Player to his first training session and kept open the option of a professional contract "at a later stage". There was no evidence of negotiations, development plans, evaluation reports or regular career meetings. ¶¶ 89–93
6. A bridge transfer set up to get around the NOIF could have justified compensation, but such a claim would have to be brought against Pescara, which was not a party. In any event, the evidence did not show a bridge transfer, abuse of right or bad faith by Sporting. ¶¶ 95–97

Procedural history

1. 24 August 2022Roma files a claim with the FIFA DRC for EUR 159,865.48 in training compensation.
2. 9 November 2022The FIFA DRC rejects the claim and orders Roma to pay USD 16,000 in costs. The grounds are notified on 20 December 2022.
3. 10 January 2023Roma files its Statement of Appeal with CAS.
4. 11 April 2023The Panel is constituted.
5. 5 July 2023Hearing held in person in Lausanne.
6. 27 October 2023Award: appeal dismissed and DRC decision confirmed.

Tribunal, counsel and experts

Decided by

• Manfred Nan President, CAS Panel — appointed by the institution
• Jacopo Tognon Co-arbitrator, CAS Panel — appointed by the claimant
• Benoît Pasquier Co-arbitrator, CAS Panel — appointed by the respondent

For the claimant

A.S. Roma (in-house) · Paolo Lombardi · Ian Laing

For the respondent

José Carlos Oliviera · Amândio Novais

Run a conflict check on these names →

Keywords

• training compensation
• FIFA RSTP
• Annex 4 Article 6(3)
• EU/EEA transfers
• genuine and bona fide interest
• contract offer
• giovani di serie
• NOIF
• FIGC
• first professional registration
• bridge transfer
• FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber
• amateur status
• RSTP Commentary
• Pescara
• football transfer

Summary generated with AI from the published documents — refer to the award for the authoritative text.