Recently, in September, the High Court of Justice of Madrid delivered judgment regarding the “Vitolo Case” – a dispute between Sevilla F.C. and Unión Deportiva Las Palmas, based upon the economic right of the latter regarding the transfer of the player Víctor Machín “Vitolo” of Sevilla F.C. to Atlético de Madrid in July 2017. The appeal filed by the Andalusian team against the arbitration award issued by the Arbitration Tribunal of Football (a body of La Liga) was dismissed, which sentenced them to pay the club from the Canary Islands the amount of Euro 4.1 Million, in the following terms.
In 2013, the U.D. Las Palmas and Sevilla F.C. signed a contract for the transfer of the player to the Andalusian capital for Euro 3 million, pursuant to which, according to clause 2.3, a right was granted for U.D. Las Palmas to receive a percentage of 12.5% in the event of the future “transfer” of the player, without specifying any further conditions in this regard.
In July 2017, Vitolo, having reached an agreement with Atlético de Madrid, exercised his right to deposit the amount corresponding to the withdrawal clause (the wrongly named “termination” clause) of his contract with Sevilla F.C. (Euro 35 million). However, Sevilla F.C. never paid the percentage agreed in favour of U.D. Las Palmas in the event of transfer, as it understood that it was a unilateral decision of the player and not a “transfer” per se (under its understanding, deemed to be an agreement between the 3 parties involved: both clubs and the player).
Under these circumstances U.D. Las Palmas decided to report this situation to the Arbitration Tribunal of Football. Following the corresponding arbitration proceedings, the ATF considered and concluded that the concept “transfer”
from the wording of the clause should be interpreted in a broad sense, making reference to any type of exit movement of the player, thus including the unilateral resolution of the player and his signing with another team.
The decision of the ATF was appealed by Sevilla F.C. before the High Court of Justice of Madrid, and the appeal for nullity was finally dismissed, justifying the decision with the absence of defencelessness on the part of the claimant, the absence of infringement of public order on the part of the arbitration award and the impossibility to get to the substance of the matter due to the very nature of the appeal for annulment.
In this way, it was resolved that Sevilla F.C. must finally pay the Euro 4.1 million to U.D. Las Palmas, as well as the corresponding interest and costs of the arbitration proceedings. Furthermore, it must bear the costs derived from the nullity claim filed before the High Court of Justice of Madrid. Nevertheless, this decision may be appealed before the Constitutional Court.
From now on, this sets us an important precedent for the interpretation of the concept of “transfer” in contracts made between clubs and football players, at least for those issues which must be submitted to the ATF in accordance with article 92 of the La Liga bylaws.
Andreas Terán
Vilá Abogados
For more information, please contact:
25th October 2019
