The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) issued a ruling on September 19, 2012, in a dispute between KSV Cercle Brugge and FC Radnicki concerning training compensation for the player Jovan Stojanović. The case centered on the calculation and payment of training compensation under FIFA regulations, with FC Radnicki initially claiming EUR 132,242 and later amending the claim to EUR 160,000 based on updated player passport information. Cercle Brugge contested the amount, arguing it was disproportionate and citing a prior agreement that limited compensation to RSD 1,622,400. The CAS panel, composed of Efraim Barak, Bernard Hanotiau, and Michele Bernasconi, addressed several key legal issues, including the principles of training compensation, the burden of proof for disproportionality, and the applicability of FIFA regulations.
The panel established that training compensation is a reward for youth development rather than a reimbursement of actual costs, making the club's actual training expenses irrelevant. It ruled that the burden of proving disproportionality lies with the party challenging the indicative amount, requiring reliable evidence such as invoices or budgets. Without such evidence, the indicative amounts apply. The panel also clarified that partial months in the training period must be treated as full months for compensation calculations.
The dispute involved conflicting player passports, with one indicating a training period from February 2006 to September 2009 and another extending the period to September 2001. The panel found FC Radnicki's explanation for the discrepancy credible, concluding the player was registered with the club by September 2001. Cercle Brugge's argument that the player was on trial with them in August 2009, thus shortening the compensable period, was dismissed due to lack of evidence.
The panel upheld the FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber's (DRC) decision, confirming the training compensation amount of EUR 160,000, calculated based on FIFA's indicative amounts for Category II clubs. Cercle Brugge's claim that the amount was disproportionate was rejected, as they failed to provide sufficient evidence of actual training costs or the "player factor" (the ratio of trained players to professionals produced). The panel also affirmed the accrual of 5% annual interest from May 21, 2010, and upheld the DRC's reduction of procedural costs to CHF 8,000, finding it reasonable.
The ruling reinforced the structured approach to training compensation under FIFA regulations, emphasizing the importance of proper documentation and due diligence by clubs. It also highlighted the limited discretion of arbitrators to adjust compensation amounts unless clear disproportionality is demonstrated. The panel dismissed Cercle Brugge's appeal in its entirety, upholding the DRC's original decision and resolving the dispute in favor of FC Radnicki.