Stade Malherbe de Caen v. Parma Calcio 1913

At a glance

Parties

Stade Malherbe de Caen (France) v. Parma Calcio 1913 S.R.L. (Italy)

Case no.

CAS 2021/A/8275

Forum and rules

Court of Arbitration for Sport, appeals procedure (CAS Code); appeal against a decision of the Single Judge of the sub-committee of the FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber

Treaty

FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (RSTP), June 2019 and June 2020 editions

Tribunal

Sofoklis Pilavios (President), Patrick Grandjean, Wouter Lambrecht

Sector

Football transfer; solidarity mechanism

Outcome

Appeal dismissed and the FIFA decision of 23 February 2021 confirmed (award of 11 November 2022).

Amount

Claimed: EUR 43,265.63 as solidarity contribution, plus 5% interest p.a. from 1 August 2020, and 53.25% of the solidarity contribution on all other instalments of the transfer fee. Awarded: nothing. The published award omits the costs rulings.

The dispute

SM Caen trained a French player who moved from Caen to FC Inter Milan in 2017. On 16 July 2019 Inter loaned him to Parma Calcio for a loan fee of EUR 900,000. The agreement included a mandatory purchase option for EUR 6,500,000, which was triggered on 16 February 2020. The player's FIGC passport records his registration with Parma as changing from loan to permanent on 1 September 2020. SM Caen claimed a share of the solidarity contribution under the June 2020 edition of the FIFA RSTP, which in force from 1 July 2020 extended solidarity contributions to national transfers with an international dimension. Parma argued that the June 2019 edition applied, because the contract was signed, the player registered and the option triggered before 1 July 2020, and that edition provided no solidarity contribution for national transfers. The FIFA DRC Single Judge rejected the claim and SM Caen appealed to CAS.

Key holdings

1. Under Article 26(2) FIFA RSTP, solidarity contribution disputes are assessed under the edition in force when the contract at the centre of the dispute was signed or when the disputed facts arose. Neither option excludes the other, and the wording alone does not settle which one applies. ¶¶ 57–61
2. The FIFA Commentary on the RSTP (Edition 2021) is not binding but is a useful guide to interpretation. It treats the relevant moment for solidarity disputes as the registration of the player with the new club. The Panel saw no reason to depart from it. ¶¶ 62–64
3. Changing a registration from loan to permanent on 1 September 2020 was not a new registration, because it lacked the element of transfer that Articles 21 and 26(2) RSTP treat as essential. The player was never re-registered with Inter. The relevant fact was the transfer of his registration from Inter to Parma on 17 July 2019, when the June 2019 edition was in force. ¶¶ 65–69
4. The June 2019 edition of the RSTP applies. Applying Option 1 (the date the contract was signed) would have led to the same result. ¶¶ 70–71
5. The obligation to pay solidarity contribution on national transfers with an international dimension was introduced only by the June 2020 edition, in force from 1 July 2020. SM Caen is therefore not entitled to a solidarity contribution, and the appeal is dismissed. ¶¶ 73–74; operative part

Procedural history

1. 16 July 2019Inter and Parma sign the loan agreement with a mandatory purchase option. The player's registration with Parma starts on 17 July 2019.
2. 16 February 2020Parma wins its first Serie A match after 1 February 2020, which triggers the purchase option.
3. 1 September 2020The player's registration with Parma changes from loan to permanent, according to his FIGC passport.
4. 22 December 2020SM Caen files its claim before the FIFA DRC.
5. 23 February 2021The Single Judge of the FIFA DRC sub-committee rejects the claim. The grounds are notified on 4 August 2021.
6. 25 August 2021SM Caen files its Statement of Appeal with CAS. FIFA is later excluded from the proceedings with SM Caen's consent.
7. 29 November 2021The Panel is constituted.
8. 4 May 2022Hearing held by video-conference.
9. 11 November 2022Award: appeal dismissed.

Tribunal, counsel and experts

Decided by

• Sofoklis Pilavios President, Court of Arbitration for Sport — appointed by the institution
• Patrick Grandjean Co-arbitrator, Court of Arbitration for Sport — appointed by the claimant
• Wouter Lambrecht Co-arbitrator, Court of Arbitration for Sport — appointed by the respondent

For the claimant

Serge Vittoz · Gauthier Moreuil

For the respondent

Vittorio Rigo · Matthias Nicolai

Run a conflict check on these names →

Keywords

• solidarity mechanism
• solidarity contribution
• FIFA RSTP
• Article 26(2) RSTP
• intertemporal law
• applicable edition of regulations
• FIFA Commentary on the RSTP
• national transfer with international dimension
• loan with mandatory purchase option
• player registration
• player passport
• Inter Milan
• FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber
• football
• non-retroactivity
• legal certainty

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