The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) issued a ruling on 9 April 2013 in a dispute between Panionios GSS FC and Paraná Clube concerning training compensation for a football player. The case centered on whether Panionios or Espanyol, another club involved in the player's transfer, should be liable for the compensation. The player, referred to as W., had been registered with Paraná until 2009 before moving to Panionios via an alleged collaboration with Espanyol. Panionios argued that Espanyol should bear the compensation cost, as the player was purportedly loaned to them, but the CAS panel found no valid documentation, such as a signed transfer or loan agreement, to support this claim. The panel emphasized that proper documentation, including a signed employment contract or International Transfer Certificate (ITC), was necessary to establish liability, and Panionios failed to provide such evidence.
The dispute arose from a Draft Loan Agreement between Espanyol and Panionios, which was unsigned and disputed, making it legally insufficient under FIFA's Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (RSTP). Paraná, as the last club to train the player before his international transfer, claimed entitlement to compensation. The FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) initially ruled in Paraná's favor, ordering Panionios to pay €250,000. Panionios appealed to CAS, arguing the amount was disproportionate and that Espanyol should be responsible. The CAS panel upheld the DRC's decision regarding liability but adjusted the compensation amount. It clarified that training compensation should only cover the player's last registration cycle with Paraná, from April 1 to May 12, 2009, totaling 42 days. Using UEFA's category II club training costs, the panel recalculated the compensation to €6,904, plus 5% annual interest.
The ruling reinforced the importance of adhering to FIFA's administrative procedures and proper documentation in player transfers. It also clarified that domestic loan periods do not factor into international training compensation calculations, preventing potential abuse of the system. The case highlighted the complexities of player transfers and the strict evidentiary standards required in disputes over training compensation. Ultimately, the CAS decision balanced fairness and regulatory compliance, ensuring Paraná received compensation for the player's effective training period while holding Panionios accountable for the lack of proper transfer documentation. The outcome underscores the necessity for clubs to meticulously follow FIFA's regulations to avoid legal disputes and financial liabilities.