نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 استادیار، دانشکده حقوق و علومسیاسی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران، (نویسنده مسئول) vakil.a@ut.ac.irن
2 دانشجوی کارشناسیارشد، دانشکده حقوق و علومسیاسی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران
چکیده
تازه های تحقیق
کلیدواژهها
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
Introduction and Objectives
The compensation system for football training costs is a crucial part of the professional football framework and plays a significant role in the development of youth football. The origins of this system trace back to the Bosman case ruled by the Court of Justice of the European Union(CJEU). Following this ruling, FIFA and UEFA jointly designed regulations to compensate clubs for the costs of training young players, leading to the creation of two frameworks: Training Compensation and the Solidarity Mechanism. The central question of this article is: What is the nature and legal framework of Training Compensation and the Solidarity Mechanism, and what objectives do they pursue? Given the legal challenges associated with these frameworks and the lack of awareness among clubs about some of these challenges, the primary goal of this article is to provide a comprehensive analysis of Training Compensation and the Solidarity Mechanism, thereby enhancing public understanding and awareness of these systems.
Methods
The research method employed in this article is descriptive-analytical, and the data collection approach is library-based. In the descriptive section, the fundamental concepts and legal foundations of Training Compensation and the Solidarity Mechanism are elucidated, while the analytical section examines and evaluates these concepts, revealing their interrelationships and distinctions. The article pays particular attention to select jurisprudence from the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) to provide a more in-depth description and analysis of Training Compensation and the Solidarity Mechanism, as well as the practical challenges involved in resolving related disputes.
Results and Discussions
The primary origins of the system for compensating football player training costs trace back to the Bosman case before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). CJEU, in the Bosman case, obligated EU member states to adhere to the right of freedom of movement for workers as outlined in Article 45 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. Accordingly, football players must be free to transfer to new teams, and compensation must be paid to training clubs for the costs of developing these players. Ultimately, following tripartite negotiations among FIFA, UEFA, and the European Union, new provisions were incorporated into the international transfer regulations. The revised and updated version of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players, promulgated in 2001, established the foundational legal frameworks for both Training Compensation and the Solidarity Mechanism. Training Compensation was proposed to maintain competitive balance among football clubs, enabling them to develop young players while receiving fair compensation for their efforts. The international regulations governing Training Compensation are detailed in Article 20 of the FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players and its Annex 4. Annex 4 outlines exceptions for FIFA members within the European Union and the European Economic Area, reflecting aspects of EU law, including the principle of freedom of movement for workers. These provisions apply exclusively to players transferred between associations that are members of the European Union.
Training Compensation is paid when a player is registered as a professional for the first time before the age of 23 and signs a professional contract with a club, or when the player is transferred from their training club or origin to another club before turning 23. According to Annex 4 of FIFA's transfer regulations, the latter scenario must occur between two different associations. Based on Paragraph 2 of Article 1 of FIFA's transfer regulations, each football federation is required to establish a system to reward clubs that invest in the development of young players. According to Article 10 of FIFA's transfer regulations, a loan transfer is classified as a transfer. Additionally, if the transfer is international, an International Transfer Certificate (ITC) is required. Training Compensation is awarded to the training club in the event of a player's transfer, whether temporary or permanent. If multiple clubs have contributed to a player's training, the Training Compensation shall be distributed among them in proportion to the period of training the player underwent at each club during his formative years. Furthermore, the right to claim Training Compensation is extinguished in the following circumstances: if the training club unjustifiably terminates the player's contract; if the player transfers to a club categorized by FIFA as a fourth-tier team; or if the player attains amateur status.
Under the Solidarity Mechanism, as outlined in Article 21, if a professional football player is transferred to another club before the expiration of their contract, all clubs that contributed to the player's development receive a proportionate share of the total transfer fee. Notably, the Solidarity Mechanism applies exclusively to international transfers; Therefore, if a player is transferred to a club that, along with the player's training club, is affiliated with the same national football federation, the Solidarity Mechanism shall not be applied. However, some federations have incorporated this mechanism into their national regulations. In the Solidarity Mechanism, transfers can occur at any age, and compensation can be claimed if an international transfer takes place before the end of the player's professional contract.
Despite the established principles in the regulations governing Training Compensation and the Solidarity Mechanism, their implementation faces similar challenges. Key issues include disputes over the duration and costs of training periods.
Conclusion
Training Compensation and the Solidarity Mechanism incentivize clubs to invest in training young players and receive remuneration for their efforts. The key distinction lies in their scope and purpose: Training Compensation is subject to age limitations and is focused on reimbursing training costs, whereas the Solidarity Mechanism has no age restrictions and pursues a broader objective of promoting solidarity within the football community. In both frameworks, the nature of the transfer (permanent or loan) does not affect the payment obligations.
کلیدواژهها [English]
فارسی
مقاله
سند
منبع الکترونیک
References
Books
Articles
Theses
Documents
Cases
Websites
)