The case revolves around a dispute between FK Siad Most, a Czech football club, and Clube Esportivo Bento Gonçalves, a Brazilian football club, concerning the payment of training compensation for a player who transferred from Brazil to the Czech Republic. The player, initially registered as an amateur with Bento Gonçalves, later moved to Brusque Futebol Clube in Brazil, where he signed a private agreement for financial aid, including a monthly allowance and other benefits, while remaining registered as an amateur. In 2006, the player transferred to FK Siad Most and was registered as a professional for the first time. Bento Gonçalves filed a claim with FIFA for unpaid training compensation, arguing the player had turned professional while at Brusque.
The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) addressed several legal issues, including whether the FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber's (DRC) decision, which lacked detailed reasoning, qualified as an appealable decision under Article R47 of the CAS Code. The CAS ruled that a decision need not be motivated to be valid, as long as it is a unilateral act producing legal effects. It also clarified that requesting grounds for a decision does not constitute an internal remedy that must be exhausted before appealing. The CAS emphasized its authority to review cases fully, even if prior proceedings had procedural flaws, as the appeal process allows for a rehearing.
The CAS determined that the decisive factor in classifying a player as professional is whether the compensation received exceeds the player's actual expenses, regardless of the amount. While FIFA regulations link training compensation to the first professional registration, the registration must accurately reflect the player's status. In this case, the player was officially registered as a professional only upon joining FK Siad Most, despite receiving financial aid at Brusque. The CAS examined the player's contract with Brusque, which included a monthly allowance and covered various expenses, concluding the player was a professional during his time there.
The procedural history revealed delays and miscommunication, with FK Siad Most failing to substantively respond to FIFA’s inquiries. The club’s arguments were only briefly presented by the Czech Football Association, leading to further delays. The CAS upheld the principle that registration as a professional is the triggering event for training compensation but ruled that the player's transfer to Siad Most was a subsequent transfer, meaning Bento Gonçalves was not entitled to compensation. The CAS overturned the DRC's decision, stating no training compensation was owed by FK Siad Most to Bento Gonçalves.
The case underscores the importance of procedural compliance and the CAS’s role in resolving disputes with full review authority. It also highlights the primacy of FIFA's regulations in determining player status and compensation obligations, overriding national classifications. The decision clarifies that remuneration exceeding expenses defines professional status, irrespective of formal registration discrepancies. The ruling reinforces the uniform application of FIFA's criteria in international transfers, ensuring consistency in resolving cross-border player disputes.