The case before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) involved a dispute between FC Spartak Moscow and FC Rostov, with FC Mitos also playing a role, regarding training compensation for several young players. The players, initially trained by FC Spartak, were transferred to FC Mitos, a lower-division club, before being quickly loaned to FC Rostov, a top-division team. FC Spartak argued that this transfer arrangement was designed to circumvent training compensation rules, as FC Rostov would have owed a higher compensation amount compared to FC Mitos. The Football Union of Russia (FUR) had initially dismissed FC Spartak's claims, leading to the appeal to CAS.
The CAS panel, reviewing the case de novo, focused on whether FC Rostov was liable to pay training compensation to FC Spartak despite the intermediary transfer through FC Mitos. Under the FUR Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (RSTP), training compensation is mandatory for players under 23, payable to the club that invested in their training. The panel emphasized that the purpose of these rules is to reward clubs for developing young talent and to prevent circumvention of financial obligations. The transfers to FC Mitos were deemed questionable, as the players never played for the club and were immediately loaned to FC Rostov, suggesting the arrangement was a deliberate attempt to avoid higher compensation payments.
The panel referenced FIFA Circular No. 826 and prior CAS rulings to support the principle that formal transfer structures should not undermine the intent of training compensation rules. It concluded that FC Rostov, as the club benefiting from the players' training, was liable to pay the compensation difference between what FC Mitos had paid and what FC Rostov would have owed. The amount was calculated based on the players' earnings and the clubs' category coefficients, resulting in a sum of RUB 19,420,650 (approximately EUR 483,225.25). FC Rostov was ordered to pay this amount within 30 days, with interest accruing if delayed.
The panel dismissed FC Spartak's additional claims regarding the validity of the transfer contracts and player registrations, finding them irrelevant once the compensation issue was resolved. The decision underscored the importance of fair play and financial fairness in player transfers, ensuring that clubs investing in youth development are duly compensated. The ruling set a precedent for similar cases, reinforcing that intermediary transfers designed to evade compensation obligations will not be tolerated. The case highlighted the CAS's role in interpreting and enforcing sports regulations to maintain integrity in football transfers.