The case revolves around a legal dispute between Galatasaray SK and MSV Duisburg GmbH & Co. KGaA concerning training compensation for a young football player, G., who moved from Duisburg to Galatasaray in 2002. The player had been registered as an amateur with Duisburg from 1999 to 2002. On June 21, 2002, Galatasaray issued a document stating that the player's contract with Duisburg would expire on June 30, 2002, and no transfer claims existed. This document was signed by an employee in Duisburg's accounting department at the request of the player's attorney. The player later signed a professional contract with Galatasaray on August 13, 2002. In June 2003, Duisburg demanded training compensation of EUR 234,900 from Galatasaray, which Galatasaray refused, citing the 2002 document as proof that no fees were owed. The dispute escalated to FIFA's Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC), which ruled on November 9, 2004, that Galatasaray must pay EUR 210,000 to Duisburg. The decision was communicated via fax and registered mail on December 17, 2004. Galatasaray appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) on December 30, 2004, arguing that the fax was not received on time and that the 2002 document waived any claims for training compensation. Duisburg countered that the appeal was filed late and that the employee who signed the document lacked the authority to waive training compensation, which is distinct from transfer fees under FIFA regulations. The CAS panel, applying FIFA regulations and Swiss law, examined the admissibility of the appeal and the merits of the case. It ruled the appeal admissible because the fax number used by FIFA was not proven to be correct for Galatasaray, meaning the decision was only properly served when received by mail. On the merits, the panel found that the 2002 document did not waive training compensation, as the employee who signed it lacked authority and the wording only referred to transfer claims, not training compensation. The panel upheld the DRC's decision, ordering Galatasaray to pay the training compensation. The case highlights the importance of clear communication in legal proceedings and the distinction between transfer fees and training compensation under FIFA rules. The Panel also addressed the statute of limitations under Article 19 of the FIFA Regulations, which requires training compensation claims to be filed within two years of the player signing their first non-amateur contract. In this case, the claim was filed within one year, meeting the deadline. The compensation amount of EUR 210,000 was calculated based on the player's training period (ages 17 to 19) and Duisburg's club category during those seasons. The CAS ultimately dismissed Galatasaray's appeal, confirming its liability to pay the compensation to Duisburg. The ruling emphasized the need for clarity and due diligence in contractual matters and upheld the validity of the claim.