The case involves a dispute between Helsingborgs IF and Parma FC S.p.A. regarding the calculation and payment of a sell-on fee related to the transfer of football player McDonald Mariga. The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) reviewed the matter following an appeal by Helsingborgs against a decision by the FIFA Players’ Status Committee. The dispute originated from a 2007 agreement where Helsingborgs loaned Mariga to Parma, with an option for a permanent transfer. Parma exercised this option in 2008, agreeing to pay Helsingborgs €2 million in installments. A clause stipulated that if Parma later transferred Mariga to another club, Helsingborgs would receive 15% of the transfer fee exceeding €2 million. In 2010, Parma transferred Mariga to Inter Milan, triggering the sell-on fee clause. The parties disagreed on whether the fee should be based on the initially reported €10 million or the €9.2 million Parma claimed to have actually received through co-ownership and subsequent agreements with Inter Milan.
The CAS panel ruled that the sell-on fee should be calculated based on the actual amount Parma received, not the indicative or initially reported figure. It also determined that the payment of the sell-on fee should align with the installment schedule agreed between Parma and Inter Milan, ensuring fairness by not requiring Parma to pay the entire fee upfront before receiving the corresponding amounts from Inter Milan. The panel addressed the issue of interest, stating that while interest on confirmed amounts remained due, no interest could be awarded for installments not explicitly claimed in the original proceedings. The panel dismissed Helsingborgs' primary request for relief, which sought a different calculation of the fee, and upheld the FIFA decision, including interest on the first three installments. Two additional installments had become due since the original decision, and the panel ordered Parma to pay these amounts but declined to award interest on them as Helsingborgs had not requested it.
The CAS panel emphasized its authority under Article R57 of the CAS Code to review the facts and law comprehensively but noted it could not exceed the scope of the original litigation. The panel found that the initial €10 million was a hypothetical figure for 100% of the player's rights, while the actual transfer involved two separate agreements: the first 50% was sold for €5 million, and the second 50% for €4.2 million. The panel accepted that deviations from initial indicative amounts are common in football and ruled the sell-on fee should be based on the actual amounts Parma received. The decision reflects the panel's adherence to contractual and practical realities in football transfers, ensuring equitable payment practices. The appeal was dismissed, and the FIFA decision was confirmed in its entirety, with the ruling finalized on 28 February 2013. The case highlights the complexities of transfer fee agreements and the enforcement of contractual obligations in football transfers.