The case revolves around a dispute between the Federación Peruana de Fútbol (FPF) and Club Budapest Honvéd FC KFT concerning training compensation for the player Paulo César Albarracín García. The FPF sought EUR 41,997.42 from the Hungarian club for the player's training period between 2003 and 2005, following his transfer to Budapest Honvéd in 2008. Initially, the FPF informed the Hungarian Football Federation (HFF) that the player had never been registered with any Peruvian club, but later corrected this, stating he was registered as an amateur with Academia Deportiva Cantolao. The club relied on this initial information and an agreement with Cantolao, which waived any future claims for training compensation. The FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) ruled in favor of the club, emphasizing that associations must provide accurate player information and that clubs can rely on such confirmations. The DRC found it unfair to hold the club liable for compensation after it acted in good faith based on the FPF's statements.
The FPF appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), arguing that the HFF had misspelled the player’s name in its initial inquiry, leading to the incorrect response. The FPF later issued the International Transfer Certificate (ITC) with the correct details, including the player’s registration history, and claimed entitlement to training compensation under FIFA regulations. The FPF sought the compensation amount plus interest and legal expenses. The club countered that the FPF’s initial inaccuracies misled them into believing no compensation was due and requested the appeal be dismissed.
The CAS deemed the appeal admissible and confirmed its jurisdiction under FIFA statutes. The sole arbitrator, João Nogueira, ruled based on written submissions, applying the 2008 edition of FIFA’s Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (RSTP). The arbitrator found that training compensation was payable in principle, as the player had been registered as an amateur in Peru before his professional registration. Under FIFA rules, if training clubs do not claim compensation within 18 months, the right transfers to the national federation where the player was trained. However, the arbitrator noted discrepancies in the ITC request process, including the FPF’s initial failure to disclose the player’s registration with Club Atlético Universidad. This omission created legitimate expectations for the club that no compensation was due.
Ultimately, the CAS upheld the DRC’s decision, dismissing the FPF’s appeal. The ruling emphasized the importance of accurate communication between associations and clubs in player transfers and reinforced that clubs are entitled to rely on official confirmations. The case underscores the consequences of administrative errors in player registration and the need for associations to provide complete and timely information to avoid disputes. The final decision maintained that the FPF could not claim training compensation due to its initial inaccuracies, and all other relief requests were dismissed.