FC Girondins de Bordeaux v. FC du Gomido de Kpalime

At a glance

Parties

Football Club des Girondins de Bordeaux (France) v. Football Club du Gomido de Kpalime (Togo)

Case no.

CAS 2022/A/8897

Forum and rules

Court of Arbitration for Sport, appeal under the Code of Sports-related Arbitration; FIFA regulations applied, with Swiss law as supplementary law

Tribunal

Olivier Carrard (Sole Arbitrator)

Sector

Football; training compensation; player transfer

Outcome

Appeal upheld (6 July 2023). The FIFA DRC decision of 7 April 2022 was set aside because there was no bridge transfer.

Amount

The FIFA DRC had awarded EUR 90,000 in training compensation plus 5% annual interest from 2 March 2020. The CAS award set this aside. The cost paragraphs are redacted in the published award.

The dispute

The case concerns T., a Togolese player born on 10 July 2001. He played for the Togolese club Gomido de Kpalime in 2018/2019 under a written one-year contract with a monthly salary of CFA 80,000. On 19 August 2019 he signed a professional contract with the Congolese club Amicale Sportive Mbila Sport. The Togolese federation (FTF) delayed his International Transfer Certificate until 8 January 2020. On 31 January 2020 he moved to FC Girondins de Bordeaux for a fixed fee of EUR 50,000 plus conditional fees of up to EUR 350,000. Gomido claimed training compensation from Bordeaux before the FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC). It argued that the player had been an amateur at Gomido and that the Mbila Sport registration was a bridge transfer ("transfert-relais") designed to avoid training compensation. The DRC agreed and ordered Bordeaux to pay EUR 90,000 plus interest. Bordeaux appealed. It argued that the player was already a professional at Gomido and at Mbila Sport, that it had no part in his move to Congo, and that the FIFA Disciplinary Committee had already cleared it.

Key holdings

1. Under Article 2 of the FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (RSTP), a player is a professional if he has a written contract and is paid more than his actual expenses. The player had a written contract with Gomido, a salary and a signing fee, and he performed the contract to its end. He was therefore a professional at Gomido in 2018/2019. The amateur status shown in his FTF player passport is not decisive. ¶¶ 151–158, 160
2. Being a minor when he signed the contract does not take away a player's professional status. The Article 19 RSTP ban on international transfers of players under 18 did not apply to his move between two Togolese clubs. ¶ 159
3. The contract with Mbila Sport was valid and genuine. The player went to Congo on his own initiative to escape pressure from his former agent, who represented Gomido in this case. Evidence of his salary, flight, visa and hotel showed that he performed the contract for five months. He played no official matches only because his transfer certificate was delayed for reasons outside his control. His moves were therefore not unusual. ¶¶ 163–177
4. No evidence showed that Bordeaux arranged a bridge transfer. Bordeaux lost contact with the player between 23 June 2019 and 17 January 2020. The EUR 50,000 fixed fee was the same amount Bordeaux had offered in June 2019, and the conditional fees of up to EUR 350,000 also had to be taken into account. The 23-day registration period was not evidence of a bridge transfer. The relevant period was the five months of the contract. ¶¶ 178–187
5. The player's registration with Bordeaux was his second registration as a professional, not his first. No training compensation is therefore owed to Gomido. The appeal is upheld and the DRC decision of 7 April 2022 is set aside. ¶¶ 188–189; operative part

Procedural history

1. 28 October 2020Gomido filed a claim before the FIFA DRC for EUR 90,000 in training compensation.
2. 25 March 2021The FIFA Disciplinary Committee rejected all charges of TMS misuse against Bordeaux and Mbila Sport (FDD-7711 and FDD-7712).
3. 7 April 2022The FIFA DRC ordered Bordeaux to pay EUR 90,000 plus 5% interest from 2 March 2020. The reasoned decision was notified on 28 April 2022.
4. 17 May 2022Bordeaux filed its statement of appeal with CAS. A parallel appeal concerning FC Espoir de Zio was opened as CAS 2022/A/8896.
5. 19 July 2022The Panel was constituted, with Olivier Carrard as Sole Arbitrator.
6. 27 September 2022Hybrid hearing held in Lausanne and by video-conference.
7. 6 July 2023Award: appeal upheld and DRC decision set aside.

Tribunal, counsel and experts

Decided by

• Olivier Carrard Sole arbitrator, Court of Arbitration for Sport — appointed by the institution

For the claimant

Matthieu Barandas · Alexandre de Beaufort

For the respondent

Mawuli Kwaku Avorgah

Run a conflict check on these names →

Keywords

• training compensation
• bridge transfer
• transfert-relais
• FIFA RSTP Article 2
• professional status
• amateur status
• minor player
• International Transfer Certificate
• TMS
• FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber
• Togo
• Republic of the Congo
• Mbila Sport
• Bordeaux
• football transfer
• player passport

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