Issue I-2024

ISSN 2039-0416

INTERNATIONAL SPORTS JUSTICETEASER

Massimo Coccia – Michele Colucci (eds.)

S. Ahern – S. Bock – R. Botica Santos – M. Cavaliero – R. Coppa – A. Fioravanti –M. Flixeder – V. Jäggi – M.L. Guardamagna – J. Lamboy – F. Larios – J. Lessard –D. Mavromati – W. McAuliffe – D.S. Menitove – J.A. Mishkin – Y. Nolan –O. Ongaro – C. Pitre – M. Rentsch – F.P. Strydom – M. Vigna

2024

Euro 150,00

INTERNATIONAL SPORTS JUSTICETABLE OF CONTENTS

5.
6.
7.
8.
9.

TABLE OF CONTENTSABOUT THE AUTHORS.................................................................

17...........................................................................

21

INTERNATIONAL SPORTS JUSTICE: INTRODUCTORY REMARKS
by Massimo Coccia and Michele Colucci…......................................

25

ABBREVIATIONS

THE “SUPREME COURT” OF INTERNATIONAL SPORTS LAW:
THE COURT OF ARBITRATION FOR SPORT
by Massimo Coccia.......................................................................... 31
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.

Introduction ..................................................................................................
The History of the CAS ...............................................................................
The Organization of the CAS ......................................................................
Jurisdiction and Admissibility Issues ........................................................
Appointment and Challenge of Arbitrators ..............................................
Joinder, Intervention and Other Forms of Third Parties’ Participation ..
Applicable Law in CAS Proceedings .........................................................
Evidentiary Issues ........................................................................................
Provisional and Conservatory Measures ..................................................
Appeals against CAS Awards ....................................................................
Concluding Remarks: Stare Decisis and the Nomophylactic Functionof the CAS .....................................................................................................

33
35
50
60
99
106
110
125
133
137
142

CAS ANTI-DOPING DIVISION
by Mario Vigna.................................................................................... 145
1.
2.
3.
4.

Introductory Notes and Genesis of the CAS ADD ..................................
Structure and Procedural Rules of the (Permanent) CAS ADD ..............
Jurisdiction and Applicable Law ..................................................................
Request for Arbitration, Written Submissions, Production ofDocuments and Expert Appointments .......................................................

146
149
150
152

153
155
155
161
161

ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION IN INTERNATIONAL SPORT:
SPORT RESOLUTIONS
by Catherine Pitre.............................................................................. 163
1.
2.
3.
4.

TEASER

PART I_____________________________________________________________SPORTS DISPUTE SETTLEMENT INSTITUTIONSFormation of the Hearing Body, Hearing, and Duration of theProceedings ....................................................................................................
The Decision/Award ....................................................................................
Multifaceted Nature of the CAS ADD Proceedings and Appeals ........
The CAS ADD Legal Aid and Pro Bono Attorney Program ...................
Conclusive Remarks .....................................................................................

Introduction ..................................................................................................
Jurisdiction ....................................................................................................
Applicable Rules ...........................................................................................
Conclusion ....................................................................................................

163
168
170
177

PART II_____________________________________________________________
INTERNATIONAL SPORTS FEDERATIONSTHE JUDICIAL SYSTEM OF WORLD AQUATICS
by Justin Lessard................................................................................... 181
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.

Overview of World Aquatics ......................................................................
World Aquatics Regulations ......................................................................
Rights and Obligations of World Aquatics Stakeholders with Regards toInternal Disputes ..........................................................................................
Judicial bodies of World Aquatics .............................................................
Sport Offenses and Sanctions ....................................................................
Relationship between World Aquatics and Ordinary Courts ..................
Relationship with CAS .................................................................................
Implementation of Awards/Decisions ........................................................
Conciliation ...................................................................................................
Conclusions ..................................................................................................

182
182
183
184
196
200
201
202
202
203

THE JUSTICE SYSTEM OF WORLD ATHLETICS
by Francisco Larios…....................................................................... 205
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Introduction ..................................................................................................
World Athletics Adjudicating Bodies ........................................................
Eligibility Disputes .......................................................................................
Internal Bodies to Deal with Technical and Competition-Related
Decisions .......................................................................................................
Conclusion and Appendix ...........................................................................

206
218
226
227
228

INTERNATIONAL SPORTS JUSTICE

12THE JUSTICE SYSTEM OF THE FÉDÉRATION INTERNATIONALE DE
L’AUTOMOBILE
by Rui Botica Santos…...................................................................... 231
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.

General overview .........................................................................................
Statutes and Relevant Regulations ...........................................................
Formula One & Formula E Financial Regulations ....................................
Rights and Obligations of FIA Members ..................................................
Sanctions ......................................................................................................
Judicial Bodies and Legal Committees ......................................................
Judicial Procedure .......................................................................................
Enforcement of FIA Decisions ...................................................................
Mediation/Conciliation ...............................................................................
Relationship with the Court of Arbitration for Sport ...............................
Conclusion ...................................................................................................

Introduction .................................................................................................
Types of Disputes ......................................................................................
Judicial Bodies ...........................................................................................
Conclusion and Appendix .........................................................................

284
286
310
334

THE BOXING INDEPENDENT INTEGRITY UNIT – A NEW REGIME FORDISPUTE-RESOLUTION IN IBA
by François Strydom….....................................................................
337
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.

Short Overview of the Organisation .........................................................
Constitution and Relevant Regulations ...................................................
Rights and Obligations of IBA Members .................................................
Organs of Governance ................................................................................
The Boxing Independent Integrity Unit (BIIU) .......................................
Relationship with CAS ................................................................................
Relationship with Ordinary Courts ............................................................
Enforcement of Decisions ...........................................................................
Concluding Remarks ....................................................................................

338
339
340
343
348
363
365
365
367

DECISION-TAKING AND DISPUTE-RESOLUTION WITHIN THE
INTERNATIONAL CHESS FEDERATION
by François Strydom…........................................................................ 369
1.
2.
3.

Introduction ...................................................................................................
The FIDE Charter and Scheme of Rules .....................................................
Rights and Obligations of FIDE Members .................................................

370
372
373

FIDE Organs and Other Internal Bodies ...................................................
Jurisdiction and Types of Disputes ..........................................................
Relationship with CAS ................................................................................
Enforcement of FIDE Decisions .................................................................
Concluding Remarks and Appendix ..........................................................

374
387
413
414
416

THE JUSTICE SYSTEM OF THE INTERNATIONAL CYCLINGFEDERATION
by Maria Laura Guardamagna…...................................................... 419
1.
2.

TEASER

1.
2.
3.
4.

4.
5.
6.
7.
8.

232
235
239
249
253
254
259
278
278
278
280

FIBA JUSTICE: FOUR PILLARS OF AN EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENTDISPUTE RESOLUTION SYSTEM
by Jaime Lamboy…........................................................................... 283

TABLE OF CONTENTS

3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

Introduction ..................................................................................................
Jurisdiction of the Commissaires’ Panel, the Disciplinary Commission
and the Arbitral Board .................................................................................
The UCI Licence Commission ....................................................................
UCI Anti-Doping Tribunal (ADT) .............................................................
UCI Medical Director ..................................................................................
The UCI Ethics Commission ......................................................................
Conclusion ...................................................................................................

420
424
437
440
448
450
454

THE JUSTICE SYSTEM OF THE INTERNATIONAL EQUESTRIANFEDERATION
by Mikael Rentsch …............................................................................. 457
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

The International Equestrian Federation (FEI) ........................................
FEI Judicial Body, Ethics, and Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) ....
The Equestrian Community Integrity Unit (ECIU) ..................................
The FEI Legal System ..................................................................................
FEI Rules and Regulations .........................................................................
Russian Invasion in Ukraine ......................................................................
Conclusion ...................................................................................................

458
461
464
465
475
490
497

DISPUTE RESOLUTION AT THE FÉDÉRATION INTERNATIONALE DE
FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION AND ITS JUDICIAL BODIESby Omar Ongaro and Marc Cavaliero .................................................. 499
I.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.

The FIFA Football Tribunal: the Dispute Resolution Chamber,the Players’ Status Chamber and the Agents Chamber .........................
Introduction .................................................................................................
The Various Decision-Making Bodies ......................................................
FIFA’s Jurisdiction on Disputes ................................................................
Proposals from the FIFA General Secretariat ...........................................
Mediation .....................................................................................................
FIFA’s Jurisdiction on Regulatory Applications .....................................
Appeals .........................................................................................................
Some Selected Procedural Aspects ...........................................................
Conclusions .................................................................................................

501
501
506
520
547
550
553
554
554
576

INTERNATIONAL SPORTS JUSTICE

II.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The Judicial Bodies of FIFA ........................................................................
Introduction ...................................................................................................
The Judicial Bodies .......................................................................................
The FIFA Ethics Committee .........................................................................
The FIFA Appeal Committee ........................................................................
Conclusion .....................................................................................................

578
578
582
599
602
603

3.
4.
5.
6.

606
607
609
611
621
624
626
632
633

STRUCTURE AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION SYSTEM OF THEFÉDÉRATION INTERNATIONALE DE GYMNASTIQUE (FIG): AN INSIDELEGAL PERSPECTIVE
by Vincent Jäggi and Riccardo Coppa …............................................. 635
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Introduction ...................................................................................................
General Structure of the FIG ........................................................................
Gymnastics Ethics Foundation (GEF) .........................................................
Disciplinary Proceedings ..............................................................................
Access to the CAS ........................................................................................
Conclusive Remarks ......................................................................................

THE IHF AND EHF JUSTICE SYSTEMS
by Michele Colucci and Monika Flixeder
I.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
II.
1.
2.

636
637
642
650
653
657

…......................................... 659

The International Handball Federation ........................................................
Introduction ...................................................................................................
Jurisdiction .....................................................................................................
The Arbitration Commission and the Arbitration Tribunal for Disputes
about “Business Activities” ........................................................................
The Proceedings and Execution of Judgements .......................................
The IHF Ethics Commission and the Ethics Code ....................................
“Sport Public Order” and Principle of Zero Tolerance .............................
The European Handball Federation ...........................................................
Introduction ...................................................................................................
Judicial Bodies ...............................................................................................

660
660
662
664
666
667
669
671
671
671

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

TEASER

Introduction ...................................................................................................
Organs for the Administration of Justice ...................................................
Jurisdiction & Applicable Law ....................................................................
Types of Proceedings ...................................................................................
Disciplinary Proceedings .............................................................................
Selected Features ..........................................................................................
The Club Financial Control Body (CFCB) ..................................................
Relationship with CAS ..................................................................................
Conclusion .....................................................................................................

677
681
682
685

AN OVERVIEW OF THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION SYSTEM WITHINTHE FIMby Vincent Jäggi and Riccardo Coppa…............................................ 687

UEFA’S ORGANS FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE
by William McAuliffe .................................................................................. 605
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.

Categories of Decisions ..............................................................................
Political Crisis Following the Russian Invasion in Ukraine ...................
The European Handball Court of Arbitration ..........................................
Conclusions .................................................................................................

Introduction .................................................................................................
Rules .............................................................................................................
Bodies ...........................................................................................................
Proceedings .................................................................................................
Penalties .......................................................................................................
The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) ................................................
Conclusive Remarks ...................................................................................

687
688
690
694
698
699
702

INTERNATIONAL RUGBY JUSTICE: THE WORLD RUGBY JUDICIALSYSTEM
by Susan Ahern and Yvonne Nolan ….................................................. 703
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.

Introduction .................................................................................................
The Judicial Structure .................................................................................
On-Field Discipline ......................................................................................
Misconduct and Code of Conduct ............................................................
Anti-Corruption and Betting ......................................................................
Anti-Doping ..................................................................................................
Eligibility .......................................................................................................
General – Disputes and Mediation ............................................................
Conclusion ....................................................................................................

703
704
708
714
719
723
727
731
732

THE JUSTICE SYSTEM OF THE INTERNATIONAL TENNIS FEDERATION
by Despina Mavromati …...................................................................... 733
1.
2.
3.
4.

Introduction ..................................................................................................
Jurisdiction and ITF Adjudicating Bodies ................................................
The International Tennis Integrity Agency (ITIA) ..................................
Conclusion and Appendix ...........................................................................

734
736
746
753

THE FÉDÉRATION INTERNATIONALE DE VOLLEYBALL’S DISPUTERESOLUTION SYSTEM
by Stephen Bock…............................................................................ 755
1.
2.
3.

Resolution of Disputes in International Volleyball Until 2012 ................
A New System, a New Era ...........................................................................
Conclusion ....................................................................................................

756
759
781

INTERNATIONAL SPORTS JUSTICEPART III_____________________________________________________________
INTERNATIONAL SPORTS LEAGUESDISPUTE RESOLUTION IN UNITED STATES PROFESSIONALSPORTS LEAGUES
by Jeffrey A. Mishkin and Danielle S. Menitove …............................... 785
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.

Introduction .................................................................................................
Federal Labour Law and Collective Bargaining ......................................
Commissioner Discipline and Arbitration ................................................
Grievance Arbitration .................................................................................
System Arbitration ......................................................................................
Salary Arbitration ........................................................................................
Judicial Review ............................................................................................
Conclusion ...................................................................................................

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.

Introduction .................................................................................................
Euroleague Basketball – Structure and Organization .............................
The Euroleague Basketball Judicial System .............................................
Internal Appeal System ...............................................................................
Appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport ...........................................
Doping Infringements .................................................................................
Other Disputes within the Euroleague Basketball Not Governed by
the Code .........................................................................................................
Conclusion ....................................................................................................

815
816
816
820
831
833
837
837
840

_____________________________________________________________
INTERNATIONAL SPORTS JUSTICE: CONCLUDING REMARKS
by Massimo Coccia and Michele Colucci…......................................

843

TEASERTHE JUDICIAL SYSTEM OF EUROLEAGUE BASKETBALL
by Andrea Fioravanti…..................................................................

786
786
788
800
807
808
810
812

ABOUT THE AUTHORS______________________________________

INTERNATIONAL SPORTS JUSTICEABOUT THE AUTHORSJUSTIN LESSARD, Aquatics Integrity Unit Manager.
D ESPINA M AVROMATI , Attorney at Law and Member of the ITF
Independent Tribunal.

SUSAN AHERN, Barrister-at-Law, CAS Arbitrator and Independent Judicial Chair
of World Wheelchair Rugby.

WILLIAM MCAULIFFE, UEFA Head of Disciplinary.

STEPHEN BOCK, FIVB General Counsel.

DANIELLE S. MENITOVE, Arbitrator/Mediator; former attorney-at-law in the sports
and antitrust practice groups at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP.

RUI BOTICA SANTOS, Attorney at Law, CAS Arbitrator and Judge at the FIA
International Court of Appeal.

JEFFREY A. MISHKIN, Arbitrator/Mediator; former head of the sports practice at
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP; former Executive Vice-President
and Chief Legal Officer of the NBA.

MASSIMO COCCIA, Law Professor and Attorney at Law, Founding Partner ofCoccia De Angelis & Associati (Rome/Milan, Italy), CAS Arbitrator.

YVONNE NOLAN, Deputy General Counsel of World Rugby.

MICHELE COLUCCI, Member of the Dispute Resolution Chamber of the FIFA
Football Tribunal and President of the Council of the European Court of Arbitrationof the European Handball Federation.
RICCARDO COPPA, Swiss qualified attorney-at-law, Senior Associate at Kellerhals
Carrard, Lausanne (Switzerland).
ANDREA FIORAVANTI, Swiss qualified attorney-at-law, partner at Kellerhals Carrard,
Lugano (Switzerland), Member of the Appeals Panel of Euroleague Basketball.
M ONIKA F LIXEDER , Head of the Legal Department of the European
Handball Federation.
V INCENT J ÄGGI , Swiss qualified attorney-at-law, partner at
Kellerhals Carrard, Lausanne (Switzerland) and lecturer in several post-graduate
programmes, including at the “International Academy of Sport Science andTechnology” (AISTS), Lausanne (Switzerland).
M ARIA L AURA G UARDAMAGNA , UCI Arbitrator and Member of the UCI
Disciplinary Commission.
JAIME LAMBOY, FIBA Head of Legal.
FRANCISCO LARIOS, Attorney at Law (Senior Associate at Coccis De Angelis &Associati) and member of the World Athletics Disciplinary Tribunal.

TEASER

MARC CAVALIERO, Member of the UCI Ethics Committee and founding partner at
Cavaliero and Associates.

OMAR ONGARO, Of Counsel at Morgan Sports Law, Expert Technical Advisor
Football Regulatory, Deputy Chairperson of the DRC of the FIFA Football Tribunal(October 2019 to June 2023), CAS Arbitrator and former Director Football
Regulatory at FIFA.
CATHERINE PITRE, Lawyer, Head of Case Management at Sport Resolutions.
MIKAEL R ENTSCH , Legal Director of the FEI International Federation forEquestrian Sports.
FRANÇOIS STRYDOM, Member of the Johannesburg Bar, Chairman of the FIDE
Ethics and Disciplinary Commission and Chairman of the BIIU Dispute Resolution
Chamber (IBA).
MARIO VIGNA, Attorney at Law (Partner at Coccia De Angelis & Associati),
CAS Arbitrator.

INTERNATIONAL SPORTS JUSTICE

ADAMS
CAS
CAS ADD
CFCB
DRC
ECHR

TEASERABBREVIATIONS______________________________________

EFAA
EHF
EHF-ECA
EU
FFP
FIA
FIBA
FIDE
FIFA
FIFPRO
FIG
FIH
FIM
FINA
FIVB
FOA
F1
FT
IAAF
IBA
IBU
IHF
IOC
ISL
ISU
ITF

WADA Anti-Doping Administration and Management System
Court of Arbitration for SportCAS Anti-Doping DivisionUEFA Club Financial Control Body
Dispute Resolution Chamber of the FIFA Football Tribunal
European Convention on Human Rights (Convention for theProtection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of
4 November 1950)
European Football Agents Association
European Handball Federation
European Handball Federation – European Court of Arbitration
European Union
Financial Fair Play (UEFA)
Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile
Fédération Internationale de Basketball – International Basketball
Federation
Fédération Internationale des Échecs
Fédération Internationale de Football Association
Fédération Internationale des Associations de FootballeursProfessionnels
Fédération Internationale de GymnastiqueFédération Internationale de Hockey
Fédération Internationale de Motocyclisme
Fédération Internationale de Natation
Fédération Internationale de Volleyball
Formula One Administration Ltd
Formula One
FIFA Football Tribunal
International Association of Athletics Federation
International Boxing Association
International Boxing Union
International Handball Federation
International Olympic Committee
International Swimming League
International Skating Union
International Tennis Federation

INTERNATIONAL SPORTS JUSTICEABBREVIATIONS

NBA
PFSC
PSC
RSTP
RWWI
SFT
TEU
TFEU
TPI
TPO
UCI
UEFA
WADA

National Basketball Association
Professional Football Strategy Council (UEFA)
Players’ Status Chamber of the FIFA Football Tribunal
FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players
FIFA Regulations on Working With Intermediaries
Swiss Federal Tribunal
Treaty on the European Union
Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
Third Party Investment
Third Party Ownership
Union Cycliste International
Union of the European Football Associations
World Anti-Doping Agency

INTERNATIONAL SPORTS JUSTICE:
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS
by Massimo Coccia and Michele Colucci*

TEASER

Modern organized sport historically traces its roots to clubs and associations
which, during the nineteenth century, set out their own private rules to engage insporting competitions. Since the very beginning those sporting clubs andassociations attempted to minimize the role and influence of State governments,
legislators and judges, by establishing a self-contained private legal system (andmost of the times States let that happen without any opposition). The whole
sports system is indeed based on contractual autonomy and associational freedom,as the participation of athletes and teams in organized sport is based on theirconsent to register with sports institutions and compete in sports events organizedby the latter. Athletes and clubs (as well as any other individual or entity registeredwith a sports institution) are thus contractually bound to comply with the rules of
the game and to abide by all decisions imposed on or off the field by individuals
acting on behalf of those institutions. The widespread acceptance by the sporting
community of rules and decisions issued by such private regulators and authorities
derives from the fact that, at the end of the day, the institutional setting within
which those regulators and authorities act has been chosen and designed by the
sporting community itself. Of course, this does not exclude the existence of disputes
within or outside such community.
In particular, the members of the sporting community have elected since
the inception of organized sport to have disputes within that community settled
through legal frameworks and mechanisms of their own choice and design. Thisoccurred because of the wish to minimize the impact of disputes on the underlying
shared values of that community. Essentially, the sporting community has always____________________MASSIMO COCCIA, Tenured Law Professor, University of Rome Sapienza; Founding Partner,
Coccia De Angelis & Associati Law Firm (Rome, Italy); CAS Arbitrator.
MICHELE COLUCCI, President of the Council of the European Handball Court of Arbitrationand Member of the Dispute Resolution Chamber of the FIFA Football Tribunal.
*INTRODUCTORY REMARKSMASSIMO COCCIA AND MICHELE COLUCCIThe book is divided into three parts. The first covers the functioning,procedures and case law of the Court of Arbitration for Sport and of
Sport Resolutions.
The second part focuses on the internal justice mechanisms of major
sports associations and organisations in several sports. Particular attention is
given to the structure and rules of sports internal judicial bodies, the relevant
proceedings, the eligibility, employment, economic and technical disputes, byalso taking into due account the relevant case law.
The third part deals with international sports leagues andtheir peculiarities.
Finally, the conclusions offer a brief comparative analysis of the examinedsports justice systems in order to identify the critical issues, but also the bestpractices, hopefully paving the way for achieving the best possible international
sports justice.

TEASER

wanted maximum autonomy and control over the resolution of disputes related
to sports with a view to guaranteeing a “justice system” which would not disrupt
or damage their own private set of rules and the underlying relationships
and ideals.
Sports justice is thus of paramount importance for any club, athlete,
and any other person registered with a sports association. They all have rights
and obligations that often are unique in the sense that they come under the context
of sport, and therefore are most appropriately granted or supervised by
adjudicators that are selected by the sporting community and are knowledgeableof sports, in other words by “sports judges”.
In the name of their autonomy and the specificity of sport, theinternational sports associations have gradually shaped their institutional structure
along the years on the basis of Montesquieu’s ideals about separation of powers,
thus developing their own justice bodies to settle internal disputes. Some of themseem to be more effective than others but all share the same goal: to settle
disputes, to mediate or conciliate, and to guarantee the correct interpretation ofsporting regulations.
This is not an easy task since sports justice, and what might seem to fit
under that umbrella definition, is not always clear. Ordinary State justice maintains
its place for granting and supervising certain rights and obligations that are not so
different from those protected by sports justice except that they occur outside of
the arena of sport.
The lines of distinction become even more blurred when issues ofindividual or fundamental rights come into play. Indeed, international sports
associations have sometimes used their enormous power as private sector
regulators to exploit their monopolistic position to the detriment of other actorsof the sporting community. For this reason, the State judiciaries, as well as the
judicial bodies created by States at international level, play a very important rolein ensuring through “ordinary justice” that the sports institutions, and in particular
the justice mechanisms they have created, stay on course and abide by mandatory
rules and public policy principles devoted to guaranteeing individual or fundamental
rights, both of national and supranational character.
This book is unique in that it looks closely at a multitude of international
sports associations to consider the development of sports justice, and its
relationship with ordinary justice.
The Authors are all eminent scholars, independent practioners, in-houselawyers and arbitrators, who provide in-depth review and incredible insight into
the complexities of the topic.

Rome – Brussels, 1 October 2023
Massimo Coccia

Michele Colucci

INTERNATIONAL SPORTS JUSTICE

THE “SUPREME COURT” OF INTERNATIONAL SPORTS LAW:
THE COURT OF ARBITRATION FOR SPORT
by Massimo Coccia*

SPORTS DISPUTE SETTLEMENT INSTITUTIONSTEASER

PART I__________________________________________

ABSTRACT: This chapter of the book on international sports justice examines
the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). It deals with the history andorganization of the CAS and, in this connection, with the debated issue of its
structural independence, also suggesting some reasonable reforms. It also
explores some of the features characterizing the various CAS arbitralprocedures: the ordinary, appeals and Olympic arbitration procedures. The
most relevant procedural issues that often occur in CAS arbitration
proceedings, such as jurisdictional and admissibility issues, the appointment
and challenge of arbitrators, the participation of third parties in CAS
proceedings and the granting of interim measures are analysed in depth,with extensive reference to the relevant jurisprudence. Evidentiary issues
are also examined in detail, with particular reference to burden of proof,
discovery, factual and expert testimony, and admissibility of illegally obtained
evidence. It also addresses the issue of applicable law in CAS proceedings,
clarifying in this context the true nature of lex sportiva. Finally, the essay
examines the right to challenge CAS awards before the Swiss Federal Tribunal,
describing the various grounds for annulment provided by Swiss law. It
concludes by underlining the fundamental nomophylactic function performedby the CAS in the international sports legal system, similarly to what any
supreme court does within its national legal system.

SUMMARY: 1. Introduction – 2. The History of the CAS – 2.1 The Origins –2.2 The Federal Tribunal’s Gundel Judgment – 2.3 The Creation, Composition
and Functions of the ICAS – 2.3.1 The Paris Agreement and the Adoptionof the CAS Code – 2.3.2 Composition and Functions of the ICAS – 2.3.3 Financing____________________
Tenured Law Professor, University of Rome Sapienza; Founding Partner, Coccia De Angelis& Associati Law Firm (Rome, Italy); CAS Arbitrator.
*

Massimo Coccia

8.4 Factual Witnesses – 8.5 Expert Evidence – 8.6 Illegally Obtained Evidence –9. Provisional and Conservatory Measures – 9.1 Application To Obtain an Interim
Measure – 9.2 Conditions To Obtain an Interim Measure – 10. Appeals Against
CAS Awards – 10.1 Irregular Constitution of the CAS Panel – 10.2 Jurisdiction
Wrongly Retained or Declined – 10.3 Award Ultra, Extra or Infra Petita –10.4 Violation of Right To Be Heard – 10.5 Violation of Public Policy –10.6 Concluding Remarks on Appeals Against CAS Awards – 11. Concluding
Remarks: Stare Decisis and the Nomophylactic Function of the CAS

1.

TEASERof the CAS – 2.4 The Creation of the CAS Ad Hoc Division for the Olympic
Games – 2.5 The Swiss Supreme Court’s Endorsement of the CAS –2.6 The Pechstein Saga – 2.6.1 The ECtHR’s Judgment on the Pechstein-Mutu
Case – 2.6.2 The Pechstein Case Before the German Courts – 2.7 The European
Commission’s and General Court’s Decisions on ISU Eligibility Rules – 3. The
Organization of the CAS – 3.1 The CAS Divisions – 3.2 The Rules – 3.2.1 The
Ordinary and Appeal Arbitration Procedures – 3.2.2 The Ad Hoc Arbitration
Procedures – 3.2.3 The First Instance Anti-Doping Procedure – 3.2.4 The
Mediation Procedure and the Abolished Consultation Procedure – 3.3 The CAS
Court Office – 3.4 The Seat of the CAS – 3.5 The Language of CAS Proceedings– 3.6 Possible Reforms in the Institutional Framework – 4. Jurisdiction and
Admissibility Issues – 4.1 The Jurisdictional Basis of the Ordinary and Appeal
Arbitration Procedures – 4.2 The Jurisdiction of the CAS Ad Hoc Division for the
Olympic Games – 4.3 The Arbitration Agreement – 4.3.1 Arbitration Agreement
by Reference – 4.3.2 Compulsory Consent to Arbitrate – 4.3.3 Wording of
Arbitration Clauses – 4.4 The Sports-Related Requirement – 4.5 The Arbitrabilityof Disputes Before the CAS – 4.6 The Appealability of Decisions – 4.6.1 Prior
Exhaustion of Internal Legal Remedies – 4.6.2 Existence of a Decision – 4.7 The
De Novo Character of the Appeals Procedure – 4.7.1 The Full Power to Review
the Facts and the Law – 4.7.2 The Objective and Subjective Scope of the Dispute– 4.7.3 The Possible Exclusion of Abusive Evidence – 4.8 Standing to Sue and To
Be Sued before the CAS – 4.8.1 Formal Standing To Sue or Be Sued (legitimatio
ad causam) in Appeals and Olympic Procedures – 4.8.2 Substantive Standing To
Sue or Appeal (Legal or Legitimate Interest) – 4.8.3 Substantive Standing To Be
Sued – 4.9 Compliance with Time Limits in CAS Proceedings – 4.9.1 Law
Applicable to the Application, Calculation and Expiry of Time Limits – 4.9.2 TheTime Limit To File the Statement of Appeal – 4.9.3 Possible Restitution of a Time
Limit – 4.10 Lis Alibi Pendens – 4.11 Res Judicata – 5. Appointment andChallenge of Arbitrators – 5.1 The Mandatory List of Arbitrators – 5.2 The
Appointment of Arbitrators in CAS Proceedings – 5.3 Relationship between Parties
and Appointed Arbitrators – 5.4 Challenge Against an Arbitrator for Lack of
Independence and Impartiality – 6. Joinder, Intervention and Other Forms of Third
Parties’ Participation – 6.1 Common Features of Joinder and Intervention –6.2 Joinder – 6.3 Intervention – 6.4 Claims Brought By and Against Third Parties– 6.5 Interested Parties – 6.6 Amicus Curiae – 7. Applicable Law in CAS
Proceedings – 7.1 Law Applicable to the Procedure (Lex Arbitri) – 7.2 Law
Applicable to the Merits (Lex Causae) – 7.2.1 Applicable Law in CAS Ordinary
Proceedings – 7.2.2 Applicable Law in CAS Appeals Proceedings –7.2.3 Applicable Law in CAS Olympic Proceedings – 7.2.4 The Application of
Lex Sportiva – 7.3 Iura Novit Curia – 7.4 Overriding Mandatory Provisions andPublic Policy – 7.4.1 Overriding Mandatory Provisions (Lois de Police) –7.4.2 Public policy (Ordre Public) – 8. Evidentiary Issues – 8.1 Limits
to the Submission of Evidence – 8.2 Burden of Proof – 8.3 Discovery –COURT OF ARBITRATION FOR SPORTINTRODUCTION

The sports sector intensively resorts to arbitral mechanisms to resolve disputes.1
This should not come as a surprise, given the widespread opinion among the
sports sector’s stakeholders that settling disputes through private adjudication
systems is preferable over ordinary litigation before State courts. This mainly
occurs because speed and finality are fundamental needs of sporting competitions
and, thus, of related disputes; in fact, arbitration tends to cater to those needs
more efficiently than ordinary litigation. In addition, the sporting community has
always had a sense that the sports sector presents many peculiarities that can bebetter understood by specialized adjudicating bodies than by ordinary judges.
Two caveats are necessary, though.
The first caveat is that the resort to specialized adjudication bodies
should not be pursued by sports organizations as an expedient to try and avoid
an independent and impartial legal scrutiny of their conduct. International sports
governing bodies must remain accountable to athletes, clubs, national federations,leagues and, more in general, anybody who is subject to their authority and, thus,
sports justice mechanisms must not be or become instruments to unduly protect
those organizations’ institutional and regulatory role or market power.
The second caveat, connected to the first one, regards the use of theterm “arbitration” in the sports sector. Indeed, it sometimes occurs that sports
organizations confer (not always in good faith) an arbitration label to sports justicebodies which, however, do not actually possess the necessary institutional andprocedural characters and guarantees to be qualified as true arbitral tribunals. An
occurrence of this kind was highlighted by the European Court of Human Rights(the “ECtHR”) in a judgment concerning the so-called Arbitration Committee of[…]____________________

See the various examples of sports arbitration systems mentioned in M. COCCIA, Sports
Arbitration: Which Features Can Be “Exported” to Other Fields of Arbitration?, in
E. GEISINGER, E. TRABALDO-DE MESTRAL (eds.), Sports Arbitration: A Coach for Other
Players?, ASA Special Series No. 41, 1-16.
1INTERNATIONAL SPORTS JUSTICE

Mario Vigna

1.

CAS ANTI-DOPING DIVISION
by Mario Vigna*

SUMMARY: 1. Introductory Notes and Genesis of the CAS ADD – 2. Structure andProcedural Rules of the (Permanent) CAS ADD – 3. Jurisdiction and Applicable
Law – 4. Request for Arbitration, Written Submissions, Production of Documents
and Expert Appointments – 5. Formation of the Hearing Body, Hearing, and Durationof the Proceedings – 6. The Decision/Award – 7. Multifaceted Nature of the CAS
ADD Proceedings and Appeals – 8. The CAS ADD Legal Aid and Pro Bono
Attorney Program – 9. Conclusive Remarks____________________
Partner at Coccia De Angelis & Associati Law Firm. CAS arbitrator in the Ordinary and
ADD Division. Member of the WADA Legal Expert Advisory Group.

*

TEASER

ABSTRACT: The (permanent) Anti-Doping Division (CAS ADD) is the thirddivision of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS/TAS), together with the“ordinary” and “appeals” divisions. Conceived during the 2017 and 2018
Olympic Summit, it has been operational since January 2019 to hear anddecide whether or not there has been a violation of the anti-doping rules asa first instance authority pursuant to a written delegation of powers from theInternational Olympic Committee (IOC), the International sports bodies andany other signatories to the World Anti-Doping Code (WADC). The CAS ADD
was initially conceived to issue decisions on doping-related matters withinvery short deadlines during major sporting events, including the Olympic
Games, pursuant to the Olympic Charter rule 59.2.4. Subsequently, taking
into account all the circumstances and peculiarities of the disciplinary cases
related to the anti-doping disputes, as well as the CAS ADD specialisation, it
was considered useful for the CAS ADD to issue decisions both during andbefore major sporting events, so now having a permanent CAS Division(i.e., CAS ADD) and a temporary office established for the Olympic Games(i.e., CAS Ad Hoc ADD) with a different set of rules.

INTRODUCTORY NOTES AND GENESIS OF THE CAS ADD

In this chapter, it will be provided an overview of the CAS Anti-Doping Division(CAS ADD), its structures, and procedures, and what it means for sports
governing bodies and athletes.
To understand the genesis of the CAS ADD, there is the need to dateback to just prior to the Rio Olympic Games when there was a program beingrolled out by the IOC Agenda 2020.1 In particular, the Agenda 2020 had awhole laundry list of initiatives and best practices that the IOC was instilling in its
members and the sports community as a whole to create the betterment of sports
at every level. One of the points in the Agenda 2020 was a call for the
independence of anti-doping activities such as the collection and testing of samples
and result management. Prior to this time, with respect to anti-doping cases arisingat the Olympic Games, the initial decision as to disqualification of results would
have been made by the IOC Disciplinary Commission,2 with a right to anear-immediate appeal to the CAS Ad Hoc Division, which was actually seatedat the Olympic Games.
Furthermore, outside the Olympic period, it was virtually the norm thateither the International Federations (IFs) themselves or through third parties
connected with the IFs would collect the samples, test the samples, report the
samples, and then they would internally adjudicate the sample.
As a consequence of the above call, there was a request that the CAS
act as an independent adjudicatory body for the IOC as it concerned testing ofsamples or positive samples resulting during the Rio Games. So, the CAS ADD
came into existence right around the Brazilian Olympics on an ad hoc basis andseparate from the CAS Ad Hoc Division. At that time, the CAS ADD wasestablished solely to replace the role of the above-mentioned IOC Commissionthat previously had adjudicated the positive samples arising out of the Games. In
essence, the IOC essentially put its money where its mouth was saying, supporting
the idea of independent adjudication in anti-doping matters and requesting the
CAS to set up this anti-doping unit to take these independent decisions for gamesamples. In so doing, IOC discontinued a system that was in place, with minimalchange, for 20 years. For the first time, in Brazil the CAS ADD acted as a first
instance tribunal for potential anti-doping rule violation cases that arose withinten days of the Opening Ceremony and during the Olympic Games, but left the____________________

B. NOWICKI , Head of the CAS Anti-Doping Division, E92 LawInSport Podcast,https://www.lawinsport.com/podcast/item/brent-nowicki-head-of-the-cas-antidoping-division-e92.
2
Medical Science and Games Group of the IOC.
1

INTERNATIONAL SPORTS JUSTICE

Mario Vigna

ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION IN
INTERNATIONAL SPORT: SPORT RESOLUTIONS
by Catherine Pitre*

TEASERessence, the athletes got an opportunity to decide how they wanted their cases
to be heard, all the while keeping the process as straightforward as possible.
After Pyeongchang, there were further discussions between CAS andsome IFs where the latter noted that the new process actually worked since it
alleviated something that the Federations did not necessarily need to be in thebusiness of, which is adjudication. On the other hand, CAS had the infrastructure,
the qualified arbitrators and the personnel to efficiently do this. This led to theidea to have CAS dealing with the adjudication aspects on a permanent basis for
all periods outside of the Games. Moreover, at that time the new draft of the
WADC 2021 was already circulating and there were certain big changes concerning
the results management requirements for the signatories to the WADC, e.g.,a requirement that an independent body not associated with the IFs should beassembled to adjudicate anti-doping violations. In essence, these newrequirements set out in WADC 2021 came full circle since the importance ofindependent adjudication and results management was a significant part of the
IOC Agenda 2020.
It is possible that the establishment of the CAS ADD also stemmed
from the experience of the CAS Appeals Division since a lot of the appeals that
WADA brought over the years were because first instance tribunals just madeerrors in law, very often since they were not specialists in the area ofanti-doping or did not stay up to date or current on the trends, the jurisprudence,
the law, the issues. In a number of CAS appeals related to doping cases, theappeal was upheld since the first instance hearing bodies misapplied the rules orjudged in equity, which is not a legal basis to decide a doping case under the
WADC. This led to some uncertainties also for athletes, perhaps thinking they
can compete after a first instance and then found themselves back in litigation,
provisionally suspended, and losing results they have earned and trained for justbecause sometimes the first instance tribunal got it legally wrong.
Lastly, the creation of the CAS ADD also appears to be linked to theparallel creation of the International Testing Agency (ITA). Indeed, around thesame time as the above discussions were going on regarding the independenceof the adjudication process, the stakeholders were talking about the transparency
and independence of testing and result management. This led to the establishmentof ITA and the following delegation to it of activities from IFs, i.e., collection ofsamples, testing of samples, reporting of samples, liaising with experts, figuring
out if there are discrepancies, engaging with athletes and discussing agreements,
and all other aspects of result management. At present, ITA is now a key resource
for sports federations and efficiently deals with the first phases of result
management. Still, when the result management gets to the point where ITA cannot
resolve a case, there is the need to shift to the adjudication phase to a body that[…]

A BSTRACT : The Author contextualises Sport Resolutions’ role in theinternational sport system, analysing its unique features, alternative dispute
resolution processes and operations from a practical standpoint. Providing
first instance and appeal arbitration and adjudication services to theinternational sport sector, in addition to mediation, investigations, andinvestigation-adjacent services in a wide range of subject matters, Sport
Resolutions addresses the evolving needs of the sector for expert, efficientand accessible remedy. This paper will explore those ADR mechanisms andthe principles that underpin them with particular focus on adjudication.

S UMMARY : 1. Introduction – 1.1 History – 1.2 ADR Mechanisms –1.3 Subject Matters and Panel Composition – 2. Jurisdiction – 2.1 Costs ofProceedings – 2.2 Pro Bono Legal Advice & Representation Service –3. Applicable Rules – 3.1 Procedure – 3.2 Ad Hoc Panels – 3.3 OtherADR Mechanisms – 3.3.1 Mediation – 3.3.2 Independent Investigations –3.4 Referrals in Action – 4. Conclusion

1.

INTRODUCTION

Sport Resolutions (SR) is a not-for-profit dispute resolution service for sport
operating globally and based in London. Unless otherwise agreed by parties
or directed by the arbitral tribunal, proceedings under its auspices are determinedin accordance with the laws of England and Wales, governed by the____________________*

Lawyer; Head of Case Management at Sport Resolutions.

Catherine Pitre

SPORT RESOLUTIONS

Arbitration Act 1996, with the seat of arbitration being London. Decisions renderedpursuant to its Arbitration Rules are final and binding on parties.
1.1

History____________________For more information on this matter, see Diane Modahl MBE and Vicente Modahl heartenedby legacy but pain is still real, available at https://www.sportresolutions.com/news/view/
diane-modahl-mbe-and-vicente-modahl-heartened-by-legacy-but-pain-is-still-real(last consulted on 5 April 2023).

1.2

TEASER

Sport Resolutions was founded in 1997 in the aftermath of the Diane Modahlcase.1 Modahl is an English middle-distance runner and Commonwealth Champion
in the 800m. In 1994, further to a urine sample collection, she returned an adverse
analytical finding further and was sanctioned to a four-year period of ineligibility.
On appeal, she was successful in demonstrating that the sample had undergone
bacterial degradation due to the manner in which it was handled by the laboratory,
resulting in it being unable to be relied upon with a sufficient level ofaccuracy/certainty.
Modahl brought legal action against the British Athletics Federation fordamages in the civil courts and in the process of doing so, was left almost bankrupt.
Similarly, the British Athletics Federation went into administration. As a result of
this prominent case and its financial fallout, the stakeholders of sport in the UK
came together to create the Sports Dispute Resolution Panel (“SDRP”), later
renamed Sport Resolutions. The SDRP’s purpose was to provide independentand expert services to the sport sector, in a cost-efficient and timely manner –i.e. addressing the issues exemplified by the Modahl case. There have since been
a number of changes in the manner anti-doping rule violations are managed andasserted around the world, which include rules, standards and procedures.
Stemming from its roots, Sport Resolutions is governed by a Board of
Directors limited to twelve directors, made up of seven independent non-executive
directors, four representative directors and the Chief Executive in an ex-officio
capacity. The representative directors are nominated by their organisations andrepresent the nine founding members of the organisation. The independent
non-executive directors bring diverse skill sets, experience and perspectives
relevant to the Board’s functions. A number of sub-committees with specificterms of reference report into the Board. Summary minutes of Board meetings
are published on SR’s website. Similarly, SR publishes comprehensive reports
on its activities every year, also available on its website.
To this day, Sport Resolutions provides dispute resolution services tothe sport sector and is accessible to small organisations and large federations
alike. Although established to service the United Kingdom, there has been1significant expansion within the last few years such that SR has to date supported
more than twenty different international sport federations (IFs), a number which
continues to grow as more organisations opt to designate Sport Resolutions as
their dispute resolutions service provider of choice.
ADR Mechanisms

Alternative dispute resolution processes available at Sport Resolutions include
arbitration, mediation, and investigation. In the safeguarding context, reviews
and risk assessments are also available. Matters are administered by the Sport
Resolutions Secretariat. Where historically arbitration has been the mechanism
most utilised by parties, recent years have seen a significant increase in the numberof investigations being commissioned.
In the last financial year, Sport Resolutions received more than 300
requests for dispute resolution guidance and support, leading to approximately
150 case referrals. The nature of the cases administered by SR, and underlying
themes, varied significantly. In almost equal proportions were referrals relating tosafeguarding, selection and eligibility, anti-doping, integrity and discipline, andother matters. These were followed (in descending order) by regulation andgovernance matters, employment and discrimination, and commercial matters.
Throughout the 2021-2022 year alone, Sport Resolutions was called upon toassist in disputes involving more than ten different IFs, and parties in six continents.
Over the last six years, Sport Resolutions has seen a growing numberof international referrals. To date, it has assisted more than 20 IFs with theirdispute resolution processes, including independent tribunal services, ad hoc
panels for Major Events, investigations, arbitrations and mediations. The services
provided to IFs are bespoke and tailored to the needs of each IF, providing
significant flexibility and seamless integration within existing frameworks. This
chapter will focus on the adjudication processes SR provides to international
sport, either through arbitration or disciplinary processes akin to arbitration, hereinreferred to generally as tribunal services.
1.3

Subject Matters and Panel Composition

Sport Resolutions operates a number of independent tribunals with specialised
skill sets and defined remits, particularly in the anti-doping, integrity andsafeguarding sectors. Three hundred panel members make up SR’s Panel of
Arbitrators and Mediators. The Panel’s composition is constituted of almost equalshares of Legal Members, those who chair tribunals and Specialist Members,
those who sit as side members of the tribunal and provide a wide range of[…]INTERNATIONAL SPORTS JUSTICE

Justin Lessard– 4.2.5 Proceedings for Eligibility To Run for Election – 5. Sport Offenses andSanctions – 5.1 Water Polo Offenses – 5.2 Artistic Swimming Offenses –5.3 Swimming Offenses – 5.4 Open Water Swimming Offenses – 5.5 Diving andHigh-Diving Offenses – 5.6 Protests and Appeals of Sporting Offenses in Aquatics– 6. Relationship Between World Aquatics and Ordinary Courts – 7. Relationshipwith CAS – 8. Implementation of Awards/Decisions – 9. Conciliation –10. Conclusions

THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM OF WORLD AQUATICS
by Justin Lessard*

1.

SUMMARY: 1. Overview of World Aquatics – 2. World Aquatics Regulations –3. Rights and Obligations of World Aquatics Stakeholders with Regards to Internal
Disputes – 3.1 Obligations – 3.2 Rights – 4. Judicial Bodies of World Aquatics –4.1 The World Aquatics Bureau – 4.1.1 Composition and Appointment of theWorld Aquatics Bureau – 4.1.2 Jurisdiction of the World Aquatics Bureau –4.1.3 Proceedings of the World Aquatics Bureau – 4.2 The Aquatics Integrity
Unit – 4.2.1 Composition and Appointment of the Aquatics Integrity Unit –4.2.1.1 Supervisory Council of the AQIU – 4.2.1.2 Chief Ethics and Compliance
Officer of the Aquatics Integrity Unit – 4.2.1.3 Investigatory Body of the AQIU –4.2.1.4 Adjudicatory Body of the AQIU – 4.2.1.5 Anti-Doping Advisory Body of
the AQIU – 4.2.2 Jurisdiction of the Aquatics Integrity Unit – 4.2.3 Proceedingsof Integrity Code Violations – 4.2.4 Proceedings for Anti-Doping Rule Violations____________________

Justin Lessard is the manager of the Aquatics Integrity Unit. He is a lawyer with morethan 8 years of experience in the Olympic Movement, specializing in ethics, integrity anddisciplinary matters. He joined World Aquatics in 2020, before moving to the Aquatics
Integrity Unit on 1 January 2023. He has also previously worked as Legal Counsel to theUnion Cycliste Internationale, having trained as a lawyer at the International Olympic
Committee. He is also a member of the Legal Consultative Group within the Association ofSummer Olympic International Federations, the Integrity Unit of the International Hockey
Federation, and the Anti-Doping Committee of Virtus Sport.
*

TEASER

ABSTRACT: This Chapter seeks to provide an overview of the judicial system
of World Aquatics. It focuses on the different regulations, mechanisms andbodies put in place by World Aquatics in order to settle internal disputes. In
particular, this chapter provides an in-depth analysis of the Aquatics Integrity
Unit, an operationally independent unit of World Aquatics, tasked with settling
integrity-related disputes.

OVERVIEW OF WORLD AQUATICSWorld Aquatics, formerly known as the Fédération Internationale de Natation(FINA) is an association governed by Art. 60 et seq. of the Swiss Civil Code. It
was founded in London on July 19, 1908 and it has its headquarters in Lausanne,
Switzerland.1 World Aquatics comprises 209 National Member Federations in
the five continents, and it is the sole and exclusive world governing body for all
Aquatic sports, namely Swimming, Open Water Swimming, Diving, High-Diving,
Water Polo and Artistic Swimming.
Swimming is part of the Olympic programme since 1896, Water Polobecame the first team sport in the Games in 1900, and Diving made its appearance
in 1904. Eighty years later, in 1984, Artistic Swimming joined the Olympic Games,
while Open Water Swimming (10km race for men and women) is included in the
Olympic programme since 2008.
World Aquatics’ primary objective is to ensure that all Aquatics sports
are governed, organised, developed and managed in accordance with the principles
of democracy, right to equality, and no discrimination between any race, skincolour, gender, religion, sexual orientation, language, political or other opinion,
national or social origin, property, birth, disability or any other reason, neutrality,transparency, accountability, fairplay, inclusion, sportsmanship and clean sport.2
2.

WORLD AQUATICS REGULATIONS

Following the election of Mr. Husain Al-Musallam as president, World Aquatics,
established a reform committee to identify potential changes to World Aquatics
and provide strategic recommendations on a number of areas including
governance, communication, marketing, gender equity, events, athlete
safeguarding, sports medicine and sport development.
____________________
1
2

World Aquatics Constitution, Art. 2.
Idem, Art. 3.

INTERNATIONAL SPORTS JUSTICEAQUATICS – WORLD AQUATICSThis process culminated with almost all World Aquatics regulations being
amended as of 1 January 2023. In particular, an entirely new Constitution andIntegrity Code were adopted by the World Aquatics General Congress.
The regulatory framework of World Aquatics can thus be summarized
as follows:(i)
Constitution(ii) By-Laws(iii) Competitions Regulations(iv) Integrity Code(v) Rules on the Protection from Harassment and Abuse(vi) Doping Control Rules.
All these regulations are published on the World Aquatics website.3
RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF WORLD AQUATICS STAKEHOLDERS WITHREGARDS TO INTERNAL DISPUTES

3.1

Obligations

Member Federations and all World Aquatics stakeholders must fully comply at
all times with the Constitution and the World Aquatics Rules, the decisions anddirectives of the World Aquatics Bodies, as well as the decisions of CAS.4 They
are solely responsible for knowing what their obligations are under the World
Aquatics Rules.5
When involved in internal disputes, athletes, Member Federations andother Aquatics stakeholders have the obligation to fully collaborate with the judicial
bodies and to fully comply with their decisions as well as with the CAS awards.6
In 2022, a coach of the Mexican Swimming Federation was sanctioned
for failure to abide by a decision of the World Aquatics Bureau which implemented
a stabilization committee in Mexico. More precisely, the coach had sent
communications on behalf of the Mexican Swimming Federation, without theprior consent of the stabilization committee. A fine of EUR 500 was imposed on
him as a result.7[…]____________________

Available at https://www.fina.org/rules/general-rules.
World Aquatics Constitution, Art.7 and World Aquatics Competition Regulations,Art. 2.3.
5
World Aquatics Competition Regulations, Art. 2.7.
6
World Aquatics Constitution, Art. 31.4.
7
World Aquatics Disciplinary Panel decision of 12 September 2022, unpublished.
3

by Francisco A. Larios, Esq.*

TEASER

3.

THE JUSTICE SYSTEM OF WORLD ATHLETICS

ABSTRACT: This chapter provides an overview of the World Athletics structureand dispute resolution system. It focuses mainly on the Disciplinary Tribunal,
an operationally independent body created in 2017 to hear and decide, as afirst-instance body, alleged breaches of the World Athletics Integrity Code of
Conduct and of the Anti-Doping Rules. This chapter also outlines how
eligibility matters are dealt with at World Athletics and, more specifically,
the process undertaken to gain authorization to compete as a transgenderathlete or as an athlete with DSD (differences of sexual development) orwith a mechanical aid. Finally, this chapter discusses how technical andcompetition-related decisions are taken and challenged at World Athletics.

SUMMARY: 1. Introduction – 1.1 World Athletics Members and Their Obligations –1.2 The World Athletics Bodies – 1.2.1 Congress – 1.2.2 The Vetting Panel –1.2.3 Council and Executive Board – 1.2.4 The Athletics Integrity Unit – 2. World
Athletics Adjudicating Bodies – 2.1 Disputes Between the Bodies ofWorld Athletics – 2.2 The Disciplinary Tribunal – 2.2.1 Introduction and General
Provisions on the Disciplinary Tribunal – 2.2.2 Disciplinary Tribunal Acting as aFirst-Instance Panel for Anti-Doping Disputes – 2.2.3 Disciplinary Tribunal Acting
as a First-Instance Panel for Non-Anti-Doping Disputes – 2.2.4 Disciplinary
Tribunal Acting as a First-Instance Panel for Removal of Council or Executive
Board Members – 2.2.5 Typical Cases Decided by the Disciplinary Tribunal –3. Eligibility Disputes – 3.1 Eligibility To Represent a Member Federation –3.2 Eligibility To Compete Under a Specific Gender Category in Competitions –3.2.1 The Eligibility Regulations for Transgender Athletes – 3.2.2 The Eligibility

4____________________

U.S. attorney-at-law at Coccia De Angelis & Associati, CAS ad hoc clerk, Member of theWorld Athletics Disciplinary Tribunal, Member of the International Panel at Sport
Resolutions, Lecturer for the SSBM Master in International Sports Law.
*

Francisco A. Larios, Esq.

ATLETHISM – WORLD ATHLETICS

suspension/expulsion.7 Congress may reinstate an expelled member federationby special majority.8
World Athletics is divided into six geographical registrations called“Areas”, whose purpose is to promote, develop and coordinate athletics therein.9
Area Associations have the power to make decision in their area and elect Area
Presidents who are ex officio members of the World Athletics Council.10

Regulations for Female Classification (Athletes with Differences of Sex
Development) – 3.3 Eligibility To Participate in a Competition with a Mechanical
Aid – 4. Internal Bodies To Deal with Technical and Competition-Related
Decisions – 5. Conclusion

1.

INTRODUCTION

1.1

World Athletics Members and Their Obligations

World Athletics is composed of the national member federations – one fromeach country or territory.3 Each is entitled to attend, speak and vote at meetingsof Congress and enter athletes in international competitions.4 The member
federations are, among other things, obliged to administer, promote and develop
athletics in their respective countries, adopt constitutions consistent with that ofWorld Athletics, and democratically elect/appoint its representatives.5 World
Athletics has the right to intervene in the governance or management of a member
federation under certain circumstances, including, for example, if the member
federation is having significant governance difficulties.6 A member federation may
be suspended or expelled from World Athletics, provided it is notified and given
the opportunity to present its position before Congress on the proposed____________________

World Athletics Constitution, Art. 1.
Idem, Art. 4.
3
Idem, Art. 7. Note that according to Art. 7.1 a territory is not eligible to be a member
federation; however, this does not affect the status of existing member federations ofterritories admitted to World Athletics prior to 21 December 2005.
4
Idem, Art. 8.
5Idem, Art. 9.
6Idem, Art. 12.
1
2

TEASER

World Athletics, formerly known as the International Association of Athletics
Federation (IAAF), is the world governing body of track and field athletics.1 It
was formed in 1912 and since 1993 has been registered and headquartered in
Monaco. World Athletics is tasked, among other things, with encouraging
participation in athletics at all levels throughout the world, regulating the sport
through the development of rules and regulations and a judicial system, protecting
the integrity of athletics by enforcing standards of conduct and ethical behavior
and implementing good governance, protecting clean athletes by applying andenforcing the WADA Code, and preserving the right of every individual toparticipate in athletics without unlawful discrimination.2

207

1.2

The World Athletics Bodies

1.2.1

Congress

World Athletics is governed by Congress, which is composed of the member
federations and meets every two calendar years.11 Each member federation isentitled to one vote on each resolution before Congress.12 Congress has thepowers normally delegated to such a body in sports, including, for example,
admitting/suspending/expelling members, amending the Constitution, electing andremoving its officers.13 It also has the power to approve the members of theDisciplinary Tribunal, upon the recommendation of the Council.14
1.2.2

The Vetting Panel

The Council is comprised of a total of 26 members who may hold office for a
maximum number of three terms of four years.15 Among the long list of powersthat the Council holds, it can adopt, amend and repeal the rules and regulationsof World Athletics, make recommendations to Congress for amending theConstitution, make and amend rules and regulations for the establishment andauthority of the Athletics Integrity Unit (AIU) and the Disciplinary Tribunal and to[…]____________________

Idem, Art. 13.
Idem, Art. 16.
9Africa, Asia, Europe, North America (including Central America and the Caribbean),
Oceania and South America – see Art. 18.1 of the World Athletics Constitution.
10
Idem, Art. 18.2.
11
Idem, Art. 26. Note a Special Congress may be convened by the Council or with 1/3rd or
more of the member federations and Congress can also make urgent decision by written
resolution electronically on extraordinary matters.
12
Idem, Art. 28.
13
Idem, Art. 27.
14
Idem.
15
Idem, Art. 41.1 and 41.3. Council is composed of a President, 4 vice-presidents, 6 Area
presidents, 1 chairperson of the Athletes’ Commission and 1 other member of the Athletes’
Commission elected by its members, and 13 individual Council members.
78

INTERNATIONAL SPORTS JUSTICE

232

THE JUSTICE SYSTEM OF THE FÉDÉRATIONINTERNATIONALE DE L’AUTOMOBILE
by Rui Botica Santos*1

SUMMARY: 1. General Overview – 1.1 The FIA Members – 1.2 Sporting Power –2. Statutes and Relevant Regulations – 2.1 The FIA Statutes – 2.2 The InternationalSporting Code – 2.3 The FIA Judicial and Disciplinary Rules – 2.4 The FIA Courts____________________

Judge at the FIA International Tribunal (President 2020-23) and Judge at the International
Court of Appeal (ICA), Arbitrator and Mediator at the Court of Arbitration for Sport,
Partner at Coelho Ribeiro Associados, founder and Partner of CRA Timor-Leste andInternational Partner of Nuno Simões e Associados. Rui Botica Santos is a qualified lawyer
in Portugal, Brazil, Timor-Leste, and Macau.
1
The Author is profoundly grateful to Jean-Christopher Breillat, the Secretary-General of
the FIA Courts and to Antonio Maria Borello an Italian sports lawyer based in Turin, Italy
for the assistance in the revision and update of this chapter.
*

TEASER

ABSTRACT: This article considers the history and organisation of the Fédération
Internationale de l’Automobile (FIA), the regulations governing the FIA, andthe rights and obligations of its members. An overview of the judicial structuresand mechanisms of the FIA dispute resolution bodies is also provided. The
article particularly describes the dispute resolution structures and mechanismsof the FIA: (i) at first instance, as administered by stewards at track/racelevel, by the FIA judges of the national sports associations, and by theInternational Tribunal, according to their respective jurisdictions; and (ii)at second instance, by the International Court of Appeal (ICA). The article
also provides a synopsis of the new F1/FE Financial Regulations and theinteraction between the FIA judicial system and the French judicial system.
The relationship between the FIA judicial system and the Court of Arbitrationfor Sport (CAS) is also discussed, and recommendations are made regarding
the further development of the FIA´s relationship, for the good of sport
in general.

Rui Botica Santos

Practice Directions – 2.5 The FIA Anti-Doping Regulations – 2.6 The Formula
One and Formula E Financial Regulations – 2.7 The General Prescriptions
Applicable to All FIA Championships, Challenges, Trophies and Cups and to Their
Qualifying Events Run on Circuits – 3. Formula One & Formula E Financial
Regulations – 3.1 General Aspect – 3.2 Categories of Breaches – 3.3 The
Designated Bodies in the F1 Financial Regulations – 3.4 The CCA –3.5 The CCAP – 3.6 CCAP Hearings – 3.7 The International Court of Appeal –3.8 The Formula E Financial Regulations – 4. Rights and Obligations of FIA
Members – 4.1 General Obligations – 4.2 The Individual Rights and Obligationsof FIA Stakeholders – 5. Sanctions – 6. Judicial Bodies and Legal Committees –6.1 Judicial Supremacy of the FIA – 6.2 Limited Prohibition Against Reference toOrdinary State Courts – 6.3 The Jurisdiction of the State Courts in Relation to
Decisions of FIA Courts – 6.4 The Nature of Disputes Heard by the FIA Courts– 7. Judicial Procedure – 7.1 Stewards Meetings. Jurisdiction and Types of Disputes– 7.2 The National Court of Appeal – 7.3 The International Tribunal – 7.4 The
FIA Anti-Doping Disciplinary Committee – 7.5 The International Court of Appeal– 8. Enforcement of FIA Decisions – 9. Mediation /Conciliation – 10. Relationshipwith the Court of Arbitration for Sport – 10.1 Doping Cases – 10.2 Disciplinary
Matters – 10.3 Non-Disciplinary Matters – 11. Conclusion

1.

GENERAL OVERVIEWThe Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile (FIA) is a worldwide non-profit
organisation and international association of national automobile clubs, automobile
associations, touring clubs and national motoring and motorsport federations.
The FIA was founded in Paris, in 1904, with the initial aim of bringing
coherent governance and safety to motorsport. Since then, the FIA has growninto a worldwide organisation that promotes not only motorsport, but also safe,
sustainable, and accessible mobility for all road users.2
The FIA is an international private association based in France and,as such, it is subject to French law but not to the French Sport Code, which only
applies to French national federations.
Art. 2 of the FIA Statutes identifies the core pillars and goals of
the FIA, as:____________________

An overview of FIA’s organization and activities is available at https://www.fia.com/
organisation.
2

AUTOMOBILISM – FIA

INTERNATIONAL SPORTS JUSTICE

233

i.

FIBA JUSTICE: FOUR PILLARS OF AN EFFECTIVE AND
EFFICIENT DISPUTE RESOLUTION SYSTEM
by Jaime Lamboy*

TEASER

Maintaining a worldwide organisation upholding the interests of its members
in all international matters concerning automobile mobility and tourism andmotor sport;ii.
Promoting affordable, safe, and clean mobility, and defending the rights
and safety of all road users regardless of their means of travel;iii.
Promoting the development of motor sport, improving safety in motor sport,
enacting, interpreting, and enforcing common rules applicable to theorganisation and the fair and equitable running of motor sport competitions;iv.
Developing, regulating, controlling, and enforcing discipline across all
virtual/electronic motor sport activities and competitions under all forms
and organising championships in virtual/electronic motor sport;v.
Promoting the development of the facilities and services of the member
clubs, associations and federations of the FIA and the coordination ofreciprocal services between member clubs for the benefit of their individual
members when travelling abroad;vi. Exercising jurisdiction regarding sporting disputes and any disputes whichmight arise between its members or in relation to any of its members having
contravened the obligations laid down by the Statutes, the InternationalSporting Code (ISC) and the Regulations;vii. Preserving and conserving all documents and artefacts concerning world
motoring in order to retrace its history;viii. Encouraging and supporting a responsible concern for environmental issues
and promoting sustainable development in its activities; andix. Promoting the following values: member-orientation, collaboration, trust,excellence, and innovation.
The FIA administers the rules and regulations governing all international
four-wheel motorsports including the following world championships in the 2023
season: FIA Formula One World Championship, the FIA World Rally
Championship, the FIA World Rally-Raid Championship, the FIA World
Rallycross Championship, the ABB FIA Formula E World Championship, and
the World Endurance Championships. The FIA also regulates many otherinternational series in karting, GT, historic cars, hill climbs, e-sport, etc.
The FIA participates in motorsport at every level, via its National
Automobile Associations (ACN) and the National Sporting Authorities (ASN).
The responsibilities of the FIA extend to the millions of amateurs and professionals,
who are involved in the various types of four-wheel motorsport.
The official languages of the FIA are French and English, but French
prevails where differences exist.
[…]

ABSTRACT: The Fédération Internationale de Basketball (“FIBA”) bases its
dispute resolution system on four pillars: fairness, time efficiency,
cost-effectiveness, and tailor-made procedures. The author describes the typesof disputes that arise worldwide in the sport of basketball and the judicial
bodies called to solve them, highlighted by the Basketball Arbitration Tribunal(“BAT”), which after 15 years, sets the standard for solving financial disputes
amongst players, coaches, agents and clubs.

SUMMARY: 1. Introduction – 2. Types of Disputes – 2.1 International Transfers(Request for Letters of Clearance) – 2.1.1 CAS 2016/A/4484, OKK Spars
Sarajevo v. FIBA – 2.2 Eligibility and National Status of Players – 2.3 Disciplinary– 2.4 Disciplinary (Anti-Doping) – 2.5 Ethics and Integrity – 2.6 Technical –2.7 Financial – 2.7.1 CAS 2017/A/5050, Basketball Club Ticha v. FIBA &Aleksandar Andrejevic – 2.8 Electoral – 3. Judicial Bodies – 3.1 FIBA Congress
and Central Board – 3.2 Secretary General – 3.3 FIBA Disciplinary Panel –3.4 Disciplinary Panel (Anti-Doping Division) – 3.4.1 Results Management –3.4.2 The Hearing Process – 3.4.3 Operational Independence – 3.4.4 Procedural
Guarantees – 3.4.5 Burdens and Standards of Proof – 3.4.6 Conclusions –3.5 Appeals Panel – 3.6 FIBA Ethics Panel – 3.7 Technical Committee / Juryof Appeal – 3.7.1 Technical Committee – 3.7.2 Jury of Appeal – 3.8 Basketball
Arbitral Tribunal – 3.8.1 General Description – 3.8.2 Composition – 3.8.3 Procedure– 3.8.4 Awards – 3.8.5 Conclusions – 3.9 Nominations Panel – 4. Conclusions____________________

Attorney at Law (Puerto Rico), LLM; FIBA Head of Legal Affairs; former FIVB Legal
Commission President (2012-2020).
*

284

1.

Jaime Lamboy

INTRODUCTION____________________

CAS’ statutes, and thus the court itself, became operational on 30 June 1984.
See: https://www.tas-cas.org/en/general-information/history-of-the-cas.html(last consulted 30 October 2022).
2
E. RYALL, J. COOPER, L. ELLIS, ‘Dispute resolution, legal reasoning and good governance:
learning lessons from appeals on selection in sport’, ESMQ, vol. 5, 2020 560-576.
3
Some legal scholars even label this autonomy as “extraordinary”. See: M. BADDELEY,‘The extraordinary autonomy of sports bodies under Swiss law: lessons to be drawn’, in
IntSportsLawJ 20, 2020, 3-17.
4
C.R. SUNSTEIN, ‘Two Conceptions of Procedural Fairness’, Social Research, vol. 73,
no. 2, 2006, 619.
5
See FIBA IR, Art. 1-217.

TEASER

Disputes are inherent to human nature. And sports, being exclusively a humanactivity, is not a stranger to conflict.
The complexities surrounding modern sports, its increased commercial
value, the addition of interested stakeholders, and the heightened public scrutiny
all provoke an exponential risk of controversies and disputes. Moreover, theaccelerated development of sports law and more well-versed legal professionals
in the field provide a fertile ground for conflict to emerge in sport. Consequently,
dispute resolution has become an essential aspect of good governance in sports,
particularly in the international context, requiring governing bodies to have clear
and sound procedures to address different controversies and reach suitable
solutions when conflicts arise.
While the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), after almost forty yearsof existence,1 has undoubtedly established itself as the court of last instance formany sports disputes, sport governing bodies are where most sports conflicts
arise and are solved. Thus, having a sound and efficient system to address all thecontroversies within a specific sport has become an essential requirement ofgood governance.2
In the case of FIBA and benefitting from the autonomy thatsport governing bodies enjoy under Swiss law, its dispute resolution system isfounded on four main pillars: fairness, time efficiency, cost-effectiveness, andtailor-made procedures.3
Fairness is one of those terms that sometimes can become somewhat
difficult to define. However, in law, there are several basic concepts which amountto what should be a “fair” procedure or result.4 To this extent, FIBA’s dispute
resolution mechanism has always ensured that all parties have their right to beheard respected, which mainly implies that they are offered an adequate
opportunity to explain their position and present their evidence.5 Even if the Codeof Sports-related Arbitration (“CAS Code”) provides in Art. R57 for a de novo
1

BASKETBALL – FIBA

285

hearing, which heals any possible procedural defects of the previous instances, it
is of vital importance that national federations, clubs, and players feel that they
have had “their day in court when pleading before the FIBA bodies”.6
One of Seneca’s most famous quotes best describes the second pillarof FIBA’s dispute resolution system: “Nothing resembles injustice so much as
delayed justice”. In that sense, FIBA’s processes aim to be as quick as possible.
In sports, “time” is always of the essence. Timeliness is always a concern whether
the controversy is related to a potential international transfer, a protested game,or a disciplinary offence. Legal certainty is of utmost importance when
confectioning a club roster, in determining the strategy for the next game or knowing
if the National Team will be able or not to field a player during a competition.
Thus, in the process of having smooth-running events, time efficiency is critical.
Affordability of legal procedures, the third pillar, is an essential element
for adequate “access to justice”. Accordingly, dispute resolution procedures in
FIBA must be cost-effective. Within basketball, there is a vast difference in thecapacity of players, coaches, clubs, and National Member Federations (NMFs)
to afford legal procedures, be it to claim a right or to defend themselves frompotential disciplinary sanctions. Therefore, proceedings at FIBA level must remain
cost-effective and thus accessible to all parties. To this extent, proceedings before
FIBA in the first instance are free of charge, except for cases heard by theAnti-Doping Division of the Disciplinary Panel (DPADD).7
The cost-effectiveness pillar benefits not only FIBA’s stakeholders but
also FIBA itself. Most FIBA decisions are appealable to the CAS8 as a last
instance, but the costs of such procedures may not be negligible in some cases.
Thus, an appeal to CAS also implies high costs to the institution since FIBA
would have to appear in the proceedings as a respondent. If disputes are solved
fairly, with time efficiency, and affordably, considering the particularities of eachconflict, the costs and expenses of all parties are reduced, particularly when a
CAS appeal is not lodged.
The fourth pillar of the FIBA dispute resolution system is more of an
operational nature and is deeply intertwined with the first three. In this sense,[…]____________________A. ZAGKLIS, ‘Fast Break: An overview of how the Fédération International de Basketballhandles disputes fairly, quickly and cost-efficiently’, ESLPB, vol. 1, 2013, 113. Regarding
the de novo hearing authority of CAS, see: CAS 94/129 USA Shooting & Q. v Union
Internationale de Tir, at para. 59; CAS 2006/A/1177 Aston Villa FC v. B93 Copenhagen,at para. 19; CAS 2009/A/1920 FK Pobeda, Aleksandar Zabrcanec, Nikolce Zdraveski
v. UEFA, at para. 87. For a narrow exception to this “curing effect” of CAS’ R57,
see: CAS 2010/A/2275 Croatian Golf Federation v European Golf Association, atpara. 38 et seq.
7
See Section 3.4.4 below.
8
See FIBA GS, Art. 40 and FIBA IR, Artt. 1-260 and 4-13.1.
6

INTERNATIONAL SPORTS JUSTICE

338

1.

THE BOXING INDEPENDENT INTEGRITY UNIT –A NEW REGIME FOR DISPUTE-RESOLUTION IN IBA
by François Strydom*

S UMMARY : 1. Short Overview of the Organisation – 2. Constitution andRelevant Regulations – 3. Rights and Obligations of IBA Members – 4. Organs
of Governance – 5. The Boxing Independent Integrity Unit (BIIU) – 5.1 Compliance
Unit: Tribunal – 5.2 Compliance Unit: Dispute Resolution Chamber –5.3 Nomination Unit – 5.4 Anti-Doping Rule Violations – 6. Relationship with
CAS – 7. Relationship with Ordinary Courts – 8. Enforcement of Decisions –9. Concluding Remarks____________________

Chairman of the FIDE Ethics and Disciplinary Commission (2014 – 2022); Chairman of
IBA Disciplinary Committee (2020 – 2022).
*

TEASERA BSTRACT : This contribution seeks to introduce the reader to the newly
established Boxing Independent Integrity Unit (BIIU) within the sport of
Boxing. By way of background, reference is first made to the IBA Constitution
and other Regulations relevant to decision-taking and dispute resolution within
IBA, the rights and obligations of Boxing family members and the Organs ofGovernance within the Organisation. Thereafter, a detailed exposition is givenof the Managing Board and various operating units of the BIIU, with focus
on their composition, jurisdiction, powers and procedures. The discussion
concludes by considering the relationship with CAS and the ordinary courts
and the issue of the enforcement of IBA, BIIU and CAS decisions.

Francois Strydom

SHORT OVERVIEW OF THE ORGANISATIONThe International Boxing Association (IBA) is the international sports
federation for amateur (Olympic style) boxing. The IBA Head office is in
Lausanne, Switzerland.
The predecessor organisation, Fédération Internationale de Boxe
Amateur (FIBA) was founded during the 1920 Summer Olympics in Antwerp,
Belgium. In November 1946 FIBA was dissolved and the Association
Internationale de Boxe Amateur (AIBA) was established. In November 2007
the French name was changed to the current one, International Boxing
Association but the abbreviated name remained as AIBA. In December 2021,
the abbreviated name was changed to IBA, and a new logo and brandwere launched.1
IBA is a non-governmental and non-profit association incorporated inand subject to the laws of Switzerland.2 IBA is structured as a Swiss Verein, an
association of a corporate group of persons with separate legal personality as
recognised by Art. 60(ff) of the Swiss Civil Code. The objects of the Association,
its resources and its organisation are stated in its Articles of Association, now
styled the IBA Constitution (previously AIBA Statutes).
Since 1920 IBA (and its predecessor) has been responsible for thecontrol and direction of the sport of amateur boxing at the Olympic Games.
However, by a decision of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) Executive
Board in May 2019, and confirmed by the IOC Session in June 2019, the IOC
suspended its recognition of IBA (AIBA at that time) as the International Governing
Body for the sport with the right to organise the sport at the Olympic Games inview of serious concerns at that time about the organisation’s governance,
finances, as well as the proper refereeing and judging of boxing matches.
Since then, IBA has undertaken comprehensive reforms of its
governance, sports integrity and financial affairs inter alia by adopting a new
Constitution in December 2020, followed by further improvements to theConstitution in December 2021 and December 2022, passing several new
Regulations, settling all debts and electing a new President and Board of Directors.
The Governance Reform Group (GRG) and the McLaren Global Sport Solutions(MGSS) were engaged as independent experts assisting IBA in making
recommendations to shape the transition to a better managed and more ethicalorganisation. The recommendations of Prof. Ulrich Haas and GRG on governance____________________

Available at https://www.iba.sport/about-iba/our-history/; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
International_Boxing_Association.
2
Constitution, Art. 2.1.
1

BOXING – IBACONSTITUTION AND RELEVANT REGULATIONSAs mentioned, since 2020 IBA has embarked on aggressive governance andintegrity-focussed reforms. For present purposes, concerning the resolution ofinternal disputes, the following are relevant:[…]____________________

Constitution, Art. 3.1.
Constitution, Art. 3.2.
5Constitution, Artt. 7-13.
6Constitution, Art. 7.2.
7Constitution, Art. 14.

DECISION-TAKING AND DISPUTE-RESOLUTIONWITHIN THE INTERNATIONAL CHESS FEDERATION
by François Strydom*

TEASERreform measures were requested, received and implemented. The previous
problems of biased refereeing and judging were assigned to a separate review
by Prof. Richard McLaren and MGSS. This investigation resulted in three separate
reports and their recommendations are currently being implemented by IBA.
One of the recommendations of the GRG was the creation of a new
Independent Integrity Unit to replace the previous Ethics Committee, Disciplinary
Committee and Integrity Officers. This recommendation has been accepted andexpanded upon by IBA and has resulted in the establishment of the Boxing
Independent Integrity Unit (BIIU) which body is discussed in detail below.
The mission of IBA is to promote, support and govern the sport ofboxing worldwide in accordance with the requirements and spirit of the Olympic
Charter.3 IBA shall fulfil its mission by achieving a number of critical objectives,inter alia to promote the highest standards with respect to organisation, judging,refereeing, coaching, training, education and medical and anti-doping controls inthe sport of boxing and to combat doping and integrity issues that might damage
the sport and reputation of boxing.4
IBA is composed of the following associated bodies:(a) National Federations5 – these are Boxing Associations which are, or canbecome, responsible for governing the sport of Boxing within their respective
countries and which have been accepted as IBA members. There may
only be one National Federation from any one country.6 There are currently
204 National Federation members of IBA as of 12 December 2022.
(b) Continental Confederations7 – these are bodies composed of IBA Member
Federations of the countries included in its respective continent andresponsible to promote the sport of boxing throughout the Confederation.
There are five Continental Confederations, namely: the African Boxing
Confederation (AFBC), the American Boxing Confederation (AMBC),
the Asian Boxing Confederation (ASBC), the European Boxing
Confederation (EUBC) and the Oceania Boxing Confederation (OCBC).
2.

INTERNATIONAL SPORTS JUSTICE

339

ABSTRACT: The aim of this chapter is to analyse the various decision-taking
responsibilities and dispute-resolution mechanisms within the Fédération
Internationale des Échecs (FIDE). This task is approached by first illuminating
the rules structure within FIDE as well as the rights and duties of FIDE
Family members regarding internal disputes. Thereafter, the decision-taking
persons and bodies within FIDE are identified against the background of anunderstanding of the concepts of a “FIDE organ” and a “FIDE decision”.
The types of disputes which may arise are examined with reference to thejurisdiction, the relevant regulations and the prescribed procedures to befollowed. Where possible, the points are illustrated with a reference to caselaw. The discussion concludes with a look at FIDE’s relationship with CAS
and the issue of enforcement of FIDE decisions.

SUMMARY: 1. Introduction – 2. The FIDE Charter and Scheme of Rules – 3. Rights
and Obligations of FIDE members – 4. FIDE Organs and Other Internal Bodies –4.1 The Concepts of a “FIDE Organ” and a “FIDE Decision” – 4.2 Legislativeand Executive Bodies – 4.2.1 The General Assembly – 4.2.2 The President –4.2.3 The Council – 4.2.4 The Management Board – 4.3 Judicial Bodies andLegal Committees – 4.3.1 The Ethics and Disciplinary Commission – 4.3.2 The
Electoral Commission – 4.3.3 The FPL Judicial Body – 4.3.4 The Arbiters’
Disciplinary Committee – 4.3.5 FIDE Doping Hearing Panels – 4.3.6 Fact-Finding
Committees – 4.4 Advisory and Administrative Bodies – 4.4.1 Advisory Bodies –4.4.2 Administrative Bodies – 5. Jurisdiction and Types of Disputes –5.1 Constitutional and Legal Disputes – 5.2 Ethics and Disciplinary Disputes

34____________________

Chairman of the FIDE Ethics and Disciplinary Commission (2014 – 2022); Chairman of
IBA Disciplinary Committee (2020 – 2022).
*

370

Francois Strydom

CHESS – FIDE

– 5.3 Cheating and Doping Disputes – 5.3.1 Cheating Disputes – 5.3.2 Doping
Disputes – 5.4 Electoral Disputes – 5.5 Eligibility and Transfer Disputes –5.6 Internal Management Disputes – 5.7 Employment and Commercial Disputes– 5.8 Continental and National Federation Disputes – 5.9 Competition-Related
Disputes – 6. Relationship with CAS – 7. Enforcement of FIDE Decisions –8. Concluding Remarks and Appendix

(a)

(b)
1.

INTRODUCTION____________________

https://fide.com/fide/about-fide; https:/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIDE.
https://fide.com/directory/member-federations.
3
https://olympics.com/ioc/recognised-international-federations/world-chess-federation.
4
Charter, Art. 2.13.
5Charter, Artt. 2.1 – 2.12.
1
2

(c)

TEASERThe Fédération Internationale des Échecs (hereinafter “FIDE”) is theinternational sports federation for chess. Its English name is the International
Chess Federation (formerly World Chess Federation). The seat and theheadquarters of FIDE are in Lausanne, Switzerland.
FIDE was founded in Paris, France on 20 July 1924. It was one of thevery first international sports federations, alongside the governing bodies of the
sports of football, cricket, swimming and auto racing.1 It is now one of the largest
encompassing 200 member federations2 as of May 2022. The FIDE motto is“Gens Una Sumus” (“We are one family”).
FIDE is a non-governmental and non-profit organisation, registered in
the commercial register in Switzerland, and acts as the supreme body responsible
for the sport of chess, its championships and events. In 1999, FIDE wasrecognized by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) as the organisation
administering the sport of chess at world level.3 FIDE observes the“Basic Universal Principles of Good Governance of the Olympic and Sports
Movement” adopted by the IOC.4
The mission and role of FIDE5 includes inter alia the promotion ofchess activities in all their forms, the diffusion and development of chess among
all nations of the world, as well as the raising of the level of chess culture andknowledge on a sporting, scientific, creative, educational and cultural basis.
FIDE is structured as a Swiss Verein, an association of a corporategroup of persons with separate legal personality as recognized by the Swiss Civil
Code. The objects of the Association, its resources and its organisation are statedin its Articles of Association, now styled the FIDE Charter (previously
FIDE Statutes).

(d)

FIDE is composed by the following associated bodies:
Member Federations6 – these are national chess associations orcorresponding organisations, one for each country, which have principal
authority over chess activities in their own countries or territories and whichhave been admitted7 to FIDE. Member Federations have the right to takepart and to vote in the General Assembly, with one vote each.8
Affiliated Organisations9 – these are associations or organisations which
represent a grouping of either member federations, some regions ortransnational territories or people with a common ground or the sameinterests in some specific chess activities.10Affiliated Organisations havethe right to take part in FIDE congresses and in the General Assembly, but
without voting.11
FIDE Continents12 – these are bodies compromising all FIDE Member
Federations of the countries included in its respective Continent andresponsible for Continental chess governance and development. There
are four FIDE Continents, namely: the African Chess Confederation (forAfrica), the Asian Chess Federation (for Asia and Oceania), theConfederation of Chess for Americas (for North, Central and SouthAmerica) and the European Chess Union (for Europe).13 FIDE Continents
are autonomous entities. They can freely decide about their organs andfunctioning and are responsible for the organisation of Continental
championships under the auspices of FIDE. Continental Presidents sit in
the FIDE Council and may participate in the General Assembly, without
voting rights.14
FIDE Zones15 – the chess world is divided in geographical zones
considering proximity, common historical, linguistic and cultural trades,
level of chess activities. etc. The management of each zone is assigned toa Zonal President, who has the responsibility to coordinate the activities ofthe member federations in the zone. All the Zonal Presidents, together
with the Presidents of the FIDE Continents form a Zonal Council whichacts mainly in an advisory and coordinating function.
[…]____________________

Charter, Art. 9, and Definitions: ‘Member Federation’.
Charter, Art. 12.
8Charter, Art. 10.1(a)9Charter, Art. 14, and Definitions: ‘Affiliated Organisation’.
10
Charter, Art. 14.1.
11
Charter, Art. 14.2.
12Charter, Artt. 31 and 32, and Definitions: ‘FIDE Continent’.
13
Charter, Art. 31.1.
14
Charter, Artt. 32.3 and 32.4.
15
Charter, Artt. 31, 33 and 34, and Definitions: ‘Zone’.
6
7

371

INTERNATIONAL SPORTS JUSTICE

420

Maria Laura Guardamagna

Commission – 4. UCI Anti-Doping Tribunal (ADT) – 4.1 General Provision –4.2 Organisation of the ADT – 4.3 Proceeding – 4.4 The Applicable Laws and theJudgement – 5. UCI Medical Director – 6. The UCI Ethics Commission –7. Conclusion

1.

THE JUSTICE SYSTEM OF THE INTERNATIONALCYCLING FEDERATION
by Maria Laura Guardamagna*

SUMMARY: 1. Introduction – 1.2 The UCI Members and Their Obligations –1.3 Governance – 1.3.1 The Congress - 1.3.2 The Management Committee –1.3.3 The President – 1.3.4 The Adjudicating Bodies – 2. Jurisdiction of theCommissaires’ Panel, the Disciplinary Commission and the Arbitral Board –2.1 The Commissaires’ Panel – 2.2 The Disciplinary Commission – 2.2.1 General
Provision – 2.2.2 Disciplinary Measures – 2.2.3 Procedure – 2.3 Arbitral Board –2.3.1 General Provision – 2.3.2 Procedure – 2.4 Mediation – 3. The UCI Licence____________________*

Attorney at laws, UCI Arbitrator and Member of the UCI Disciplinary Commission.

TEASERA BSTRACT: The Author examines the Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI)governance with particular attention to the judicial bodies. The UCI has
a judicial structure that is responsible for handling disciplinary mattersrelated to violations of UCI rules and regulations, ethical principles andanti-doping rules.
The Commissaires’ Panel oversees and enforces the rules and regulations ofcycling competitions while the Disciplinary Commission is responsible forhandling disciplinary matters related to the UCI’s rules and regulations.
The Arbitral Board is responsible for resolving disputes between parties within
the cycling community, including riders, teams, organizers, and national
federations. The UCI License Commission is responsible for the management
and allocation of licenses to professional cycling teams.
Finally, the Ethics Commission investigates allegations of ethical violations
by individuals or organizations affiliated with the UCI, while the Anti-Doping
Tribunal is responsible for adjudicating anti-doping rule violations in cycling.
Overall, the UCI’s judicial structure is designed to ensure that the sport ofcycling is conducted in a fair and ethical manner, and that all athletes areheld to the highest standards of sportsmanship and integrity.

INTRODUCTIONThe Union Cycliste Internationale (hereafter “UCI”) is the worldwide governing
body for cycling. It was founded in Paris (France) in 1900 its headquarters weremoved to Switzerland in 1969, first to Geneva, then, in 1992, to Lausanne and,
finally, since 2002, to Aigle. The UCI is a non-governmental international
association, with a non-profit-making purpose of international interest andpursuant to Articles 60 ff. of the Swiss Civil Code, it has legal personality.1
The UCI objectives are the diffusion, organization and regulation of
cycling worldwide (including virtual/electronic cycling).2
In its objectives, the UCI promotes gender-parity, diversity and equity
in all aspects of cycling as well as Para-cycling; it cooperates with the____________________

Swiss Civil Code, Art. 60: “Associations with a political, religious, scientific, cultural,charitable, social or other non-commercial purpose acquire legal personality as soon
as their intention to exist as a corporate body is apparent from their articles of association.
The articles of association must be done in writing and indicate the objects of theassociation, its resources and its organisation”.
2
UCI Constitution, art. 2: “The objectives of the UCI are:- to direct, develop, regulate, control and discipline cycling under all forms worldwide;- to promote cycling in all the countries of the world and at all levels;- to organize, for all cycling sport disciplines, world championships of which it is thesole holder and owner;- to draw up regulations and provisions and ensure their enforcement;- to encourage friendship between all members of the cycling world;- to promote sportsmanship, integrity, ethics and fair play with a view to preventing
all methods or practices such as corruption or doping, which might jeopardize theintegrity of competitions, riders, officials and members or give rise to abuse of cycling;- to promote gender-parity and equity in all aspects of cycling;- to promote Para-cycling;- to advocate for the safety and rights of cyclists;- to represent the sport of cycling and defend its interests before the International
Olympic Committee, the International Paralympic Committee and all national andinternational authorities;- to cooperate with the International Olympic Committee, the International Paralympic
Committee in particular as regards the participation of cyclists in the Olympic Games.
- to direct, develop, regulate, control and discipline any and all virtual/electronic
cycling activities and competitions under all forms worldwide and to organise world
championships of which it is the sole holder and owner”.
1

CYCLING – UCI

INTERNATIONAL SPORTS JUSTICE

421

International Olympic and Paralympic Committee representing the sport of cycling
itself and advocates for the safety and rights of cyclists in general. In 2019, theUCI was the first International Sport Federation to obtain the Economic Dividends
for Gender Equality certification (EDGE) for gender equity in the workplace.3 In
2019, the UCI supported more than 120 projects implemented by National
Federations and Continental Confederations that do not yet have the resources,
facilities, or expertise to permit them to reach the highest levels.
The UCI governs the following disciplines: road, track, mountain bike,
cyclo-cross, BMX Racing, BMX Freestyle, trials, indoor cycling, cycling cross,gravel, e-sport and para-cycling.
1.2

by Mikael Rentsch*

The UCI Members and Their Obligations____________________The EDGE certification measures the performance of organizations in terms of genderand pay equity, the existence of a framework guaranteeing equal career opportunities, andthe promotion of an inclusive work culture for all employees.
4
UCI Constitution, Art. 15: “Each national federation shall pay an annual membershipcontribution, the amount of which shall be fixed by the Congress on a proposal of theManagement Committee”.
5
The Continental Confederation are Africa, Asia, Europe, Oceania, PanAmerica.
6
UCI Constitution, Art. 7: “The national federations must manage their internal affairs with total
independence and ensure that no third party interferes in their operations. They must remainautonomous and resist all political, religious and financial pressure which may infringe theircommitment to abide by the Constitution of the UCI. Any external form of interference or attempt
to interfere must be reported to the UCI”.
7
UCI Cycling Regulations, Part 1 General Organisation of cycling as a sport, para. 1.1.001“Definition” of licences.

TEASERThe UCI members are the national federations of the States recognised as
independent and admitted by Congress, which also determines the annual
membership contribution due on 31 of March of each year.4 The National
federations from the same continent are grouped together in a continental
confederation that promotes the development of cycling in its respective continent.5
The National Federation must comply with the UCI Constitution and Regulations,as well as with all the decisions taken in accordance therewith.
Each National Federation manages its internal affairs independently inorder to ensure that no third party, including the UCI, interferes in their operations.
Indeed, they must remain autonomous and resist all political, religious and financialpressure which may infringe their commitment to abide by the Constitutionof the UCI.6
Finally, the UCI issues licenses to riders. A licence is an identity document
confirming that its holder undertakes to respect the constitution and regulations
and authorises him/her to participate in cycling events as riders.7[…]
3

THE JUSTICE SYSTEM OF THE INTERNATIONAL
EQUESTRIAN FEDERATIONABSTRACT: The Fédération Equestre Internationale (International EquestrianFederation – FEI) is the world governing body for horse sport recognisedby the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and was founded in 1921.
The FEI’s mission is to drive and develop equestrian sport globally in amodern, sustainable and structured manner with guaranteed integrity, athlete
welfare, equal opportunity and a fair and ethical partnership with the horse.
This chapter provides an overview of the FEI’s organisation and legal system,
including the different processes whether on-site or off-site legal matters. In
addition, key FEI Rules and provisions are highlighted either due to theirimportance in the FEI regulatory framework or given their challenge in frontof the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) or other courts.

SUMMARY: 1. The International Equestrian Federation (FEI) – 1.1 Introduction –1.2. FEI’s Membership – 1.2.1 FEI Full Members – 1.2.2 FEI Associate Members– 1.3 FEI’s Organisation – 1.3.1 FEI General Assembly – 1.3.2 FEI Board andFEI Executive Board – 2. FEI Judicial Body, Ethics, and Court of Arbitration forSport (CAS) – 2.1 FEI Tribunal – 2.2 Ethics Panel – 2.3 Court of Arbitrationfor Sport (CAS) – 3. The Equestrian Community Integrity Unit (ECIU) –4. The FEI Legal System – 4.1 Review of the FEI Legal System – 4.1.1 On-site
Legal Process – 4.1.1.1 The Use of Video Evidence – 4.1.1.2 No Appeal
Committee – 4.1.1.3 Time of Implementation of a Suspension – 4.1.2 Off-site
Legal Process – 4.1.2.1 Appeals – 4.1.2.2 Disciplinary Proceedings –4.1.2.2.1 FEI’s Discretionary Power To Open Disciplinary Proceedings –4.1.2.2.2 FEI Administrative Disciplinary Procedure – 5. FEI Rules and Regulations– 5.1 FEI Anti-Doping Rules –5.1.1 FEI Anti-Doping Rules for Human Athletes –____________________*

Legal Director of the Fédération Equestre Internationale (FEI).

458

Mikael Rentsch

EQUESTIAN – FEI

accepted the recommendations of the FEI Membership Working Group and the
proposed changes to the FEI Statutes were ultimately adopted at the
FEI Extraordinary General Assembly in Antwerp, Belgium and effective as of
17 November 2021. Therefore, the FEI membership is now divided into two
categories of members: Full Members and Associate Members.

5.1.2 FEI Equine Anti-Doping and Controlled Medication Regulations –5.1.2.1 Provisional Suspension of the Horse – 5.2. Unsanctioned Event Provisions– 5.2.1 Unsanctioned Event – Definition, Rationale, Consequences –5.2.2 Unsanctioned Event’s Provisions Imposed Against FEI Officials –5.2.3 The Belgian Competition Authority – 5.3 FEI Safeguarding Policy Against
Harassment and Abuse – 5.4 FEI Code of Conduct for the Welfare of the Horse– 6. Russian Invasion in Ukraine – 6.1 Removal of all FEI Events in Russia andBelarus –6.2 Prohibition of all Russian and Belarussian Athletes, Horses, andOfficials To Participate in FEI Events – 6.2.1 FEI Board Emergency Resolution
and FEI Tribunal Decision – 6.2.2 Vaud Cantonal Civil Court Decision on Request
for Provisional Measures – 7. Conclusion

THE INTERNATIONAL EQUESTRIAN FEDERATION (FEI)

1.1

Introduction

Founded in 1921, the International Equestrian Federation (“Fédération Equestre
Internationale” or “FEI”) is the world governing body for the disciplines of Jumping,
Dressage & Para Dressage, Eventing, Driving & Para Driving, Endurance,
and Vaulting. The FEI is a not-for-profit association established and organised inaccordance with Articles 60 et seq. of the Swiss civil code.1 The FEI Headquarters
are located in Lausanne, Switzerland.2 The FEI’s mission is to drive and develop
equestrian sport globally in a modern, sustainable, and structured manner withguaranteed integrity, athletes’ and horses’ welfare, equal opportunity, and a fairand ethical partnership with the horse.
1.2

FEI’s Membership

Membership in the FEI is open to the one national governing bodyfrom any country which is effectively in control of or is in a position toeffectively control at least the Olympic Equestrian Disciplines and supported by
its National Olympic Committee.3
Further to an initial proposal from the European Equestrian Federation
to revise the FEI’s membership structure, the FEI Board established an FEIMembership Working Group on 16 March 2021 to study such a proposal andmake its suggestions and recommendations to the FEI Board. The FEI Board____________________FEI Statutes, Art. 4.
2
Ibidem.
3
FEI Statutes, Art. 5.1.
1

1.2.1

TEASER

1.

459

FEI Full Members

The FEI Full Members are those members who were existing members on
17 November 20214 (i.e. on the date of the FEI Extraordinary General Assembly
when the changes to the FEI Statutes were adopted) as there was a clear mandate
and decision from the FEI Board that there should not be any retroactive effectof the new provisions in the FEI Statutes on FEI membership. In addition, Associate
Members who fulfil the development goals as established by the FEI Board shallbe granted full Membership status. One restriction applies as to the voting righton the FEI Olympic and Paralympic Regulations for those Full Members who
acquire this status having formerly been an Associate Member as they will only
be entitled to cast such a vote once they have participated in a World and/orContinental Championship for Seniors in any Olympic Discipline and in the
Paralympic Discipline respectively.5
1.2.2

FEI Associate Members

The FEI Associate Members are those prospective National Federations thathave met all the requirements to become a Member of the FEI and that areapproved by the FEI General Assembly.6 Associate Members have limited rights
but can host and participate in international equestrian events, and attend the FEIGeneral Assembly and any other FEI official meetings. However, a National
Federation that is an Associate Member is not entitled to vote at the FEI General
Assembly and is not entitled to propose or nominate candidates for appointed orelected FEI positions.
[…]____________________FEI Statutes, Art. 5.2.
Ibidem.
6
Ibidem.
4
5

INTERNATIONAL SPORTS JUSTICE

500

Omar Ongaro and Marc Cavalierorole and competences are fundamental to guarantee the proper functioningof FIFA, its member associations and officials as well as the correct anduniform application of the diverse regulations by stakeholders.
The second part of this chapter shall focus on the three FIFA judicial bodies,
namely: the FIFA Disciplinary Committee, the FIFA Appeal Committee andthe FIFA Ethics Committee taking into due account the latest regulatory
amendments. Particular attention shall be given to the FIFA Disciplinary
Committee and the enforcement procedure that has been implemented at FIFAlevel as well as the extension procedure of sanctions taken at national levelto have worldwide effect.

DISPUTE RESOLUTION AT THE FÉDÉRATIONINTERNATIONALE DE FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION
AND ITS JUDICIAL BODIESby Omar Ongaro* and Marc Cavaliero**____________________OMAR ONGARO, Of Counsel at Morgan Sports Law, Expert Technical Advisor Football
Regulatory, Deputy Chairperson of the DRC of the FIFA Football Tribunal (October 2019
to June 2023), CAS Arbitrator and former Director Football Regulatory at FIFA.
**
MARC CAVALIERO is a Swiss lawyer and Partner at Cavaliero & Associates, a boutique law
firm specialized in sports law. He has ample experience in the field of sports law after
having worked at FIFA for almost 10 years and having returned to private practicesince 2017. Marc is a member of the UCI Ethics Committee and FINA’s Chief Ethics andCompliance Officer.
*

TEASER

ABSTRACT: FIFA defends the principle according to which, as a general rule,
disputes between the members of the football movement should be dealt withand settled within the structures of organised football, i.e. by sporting decisionmaking bodies. Bearing this principle in mind, in the field of players’ status
FIFA has created and implemented a successful dispute resolution systemthat it puts at disposal of the various stakeholders, i.e. member associations,clubs, players, coaches as well as licensed match and football agents, inorder to deal with the various litigations that might arise amongst them, mainlyof a contractual nature.
In the first part of this chapter the relevant decision-making bodies within
the pertinent dispute resolution system shall be briefly introduced, as well as
their respective competences. Furthermore, the presentation aims at describing
FIFA’s competence/jurisdiction to hear a series of specific disputes and attouching on the delimitations with regard to ordinary courts of law andpossibly existing national decision-making bodies established within theframework of a member association.
FIFA has put in place judicial bodies which may impose a wide range ofsanctions in case of breach of its regulations. The scope of action of thesejudicial bodies is immense and covers a number of different situations. Their

SUMMARY: Part I The FIFA Football Tribunal: the Dispute Resolution Chamber, thePlayers’ Status Chamber and the Agents Chamber – 1. Introduction –1.1 General Remarks – 1.2 Statutory Provisions – 2. The Various Decision-Making
Bodies – 2.1 Overview – 2.2 The Members of the Chambers – 2.3 The Players’
Status Chamber – 2.4 The Dispute Resolution Chamber – 2.5 The Agents Chamber– 3. FIFA’s Jurisdiction on Disputes – 3.1 Employment-Related Disputes Between
a Club and a Player of an International Dimension – 3.2 Disputes Between Clubsand Players in Relation to the Maintenance of Contractual Stability –3.3 Employment-Related Disputes Between a Club or an Association and a Coachof an International Dimension – 3.4 Summary of the Principles for
Employment-Related Disputes of an International Dimension – 3.5 Disputes
Relating To Training Compensation and the Solidarity Mechanism – 3.6 Disputes
in Relation to the FIFA Clearing House Regulations and the EPP – 3.7 Other
Disputes Between Clubs Belonging to Different Associations – 3.8 Disputes
Concerning the Activity of Licensed Football Agents – 3.9 Summary of FIFA’s
Jurisdiction on Disputes in Table Form – 4. Proposals from the FIFA General
Secretariat – 5. Mediation – 6. FIFA’s Jurisdiction on Regulatory Applications –7. Appeals – 8. Some Selected Procedural Aspects – 8.1. Independence andConflict of Interest – 8.2 Applicable Material Law – 8.3 Statute of Limitations /Prescription – 8.4 Procedural Form and Languages of the Proceedings –8.5 Sequence of the Procedure – 8.6 Preliminary Procedural Matters –8.7 Notifications of Decisions – 8.8 Costs – 8.9 Enforcement / Execution –9. Conclusions – Part II The Judicial Bodies of FIFA – 1. Introduction –1.1 General Remarks – 1.2 Statutory Provisions – 2. The Judicial Bodies –2.1 The FIFA Disciplinary Committee – 2.1.1 General Remarks – 2.1.2 Offences– 2.1.3 Some Procedural and Organisational Aspects – 2.1.4 Two Examples of
the FIFA Disciplinary Committee’s Competencies: Failure to Respect Decisions
and Extension of Sanctions To Have Worldwide Effect – 2.1.4.1 The Procedureof Enforcement within the Frame of the FIFA Dispute Resolution System –2.1.4.2 Extension of Sanctions To Have Worldwide Effect – 3. The FIFA Ethics
Committee – 4. The FIFA Appeal Committee – 5. Conclusion

FOOTBALL – FIFAPART ITHE FIFA FOOTBALL TRIBUNAL: THE DISPUTERESOLUTION CHAMBER, THE PLAYERS’ STATUS
CHAMBER AND THE AGENTS CHAMBER

1.

INTRODUCTION

1.1

General Remarks____________________

Available at https://digitalhub.fifa.com/m/d31f8046f6c6311/original/Regulations-on-theStatus-and-Transfer-of-Players-May-2023-edition.pdf. Without further specification,reference is made to the current May 2023 edition of the Regulations.
2
Cf. Regulations, Chapter IV, Art. 13 ff: Maintenance of contractual stability between
professionals and clubs.
3
Cf. Idem, Chapter VII, Art. 19 ff: International transfers involving minors.
4
Cf. Idem, Art. 20 in conjunction with Annexe 4: Training compensation.
5
Cf. Idem, Art. 21 in conjunction with Annexe 5: Solidarity mechanism.
6
Cf. Regulations, 2001 editions, Art. 42.

UEFA’S ORGANS FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE
by William McAuliffe*

TEASER

For those involved in sports law and in particular, in football matters, there ismost certainly no need to recall that the current dispute resolution systemestablished within the structures of the Fédération Internationale de Football
Association (FIFA) is one of the most important outcomes of the complete revisionof the various rules pertaining to the international transfer of players carried out
back in the year 2000, respectively early 2001. Like most of the principles
currently contained in the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players(hereinafter: the Regulations),1 the basis of the relevant system is to be found in
the agreement reached between FIFA, Union des associations européennes defootball (UEFA) and the European Commission in March 2001. Besides
addressing topics of substantive nature, namely the contractual stability,2 theprotection of minors,3 the training of young players4 as well as the solidarity in the
football world,5 said agreement also explicitly referred to the creation of a dispute
resolution system. It is within the scope of this background that with the coming
into force of the 2001 edition of the Regulations on 1 September 2001, FIFA
laid the fundament for the implementation of a dispute resolution and arbitration
system6 that has rapidly become more and more popular and today enjoys a highgrade of recognition, credibility and acceptance.
The pertinent dispute resolution system provides the various stakeholders
with efficient means suitable to settle their mainly contractual litigations within the
football structures without the need to seek redress before civil courts.
The ever-growing popularity of the system, particularly in relation toemployment-related disputes of an international dimension between clubs and[…]
1

INTERNATIONAL SPORTS JUSTICE501

A BSTRACT: The Author explains the functioning of UEFA’s organs for theadministration of justice with a particular focus on the Control Ethics andDisciplinary Body and the Appeals Body which play the central adjudicatoryrole for disciplinary incidents arising in UEFA competition matches.
Given the amount of UEFA competitions at club and national level, and withthe planned restructuring of the UEFA’s club competitions from 2024, theworkload of these bodies has been expanding and will continue to grow.
With matches played in quick succession, ensuring that stakeholders’ cases
are considered and decided without unnecessary delays in a thorough andfair manner requires a robust disciplinary framework built on efficiency
predictability and flexibility.
The chapter also provides an overview of the workings of the UEFA Club
Financial Control Body which deals with financial fair play and financial
sustainability matters.

SUMMARY: 1. Introduction – 1.1 Statutes & Regulatory Framework – 2. Organs for
the Administration of Justice – 2.1 Control, Ethics and Disciplinary Body (CEDB)– 2.2 Appeals Body (AB) – 2.3 Ethics and Disciplinary Inspectors (EDIs) –2.4 Club Financial Control Body (CFCB) – 3. Jurisdiction & Applicable Law –3.1 Material Application – 3.2 Personal Application – 3.3 Temporal Application –3.4 Applicable Law – 4. Types of Proceedings – 4.1 Misconduct of Players
and Officials – 4.2 Order and Security at Matches – 4.2.1 Invasions of the Fieldof Play – 4.2.2 Throwing of Objects – 4.2.3 Lighting of Fireworks – 4.2.4 Use of
Laser Pointers – 4.2.5 Transmission of Provocative or Offensive Messages –4.2.6 Acts of Damage to Physical Property – 4.2.7 Crowd Disturbances –4.2.8 Blocking of Public Passageways – 4.3 Match Fixing – 4.4 Doping –____________________*

UEFA Head of Disciplinary.

606

FOOTBALL – UEFA

William McAuliffe

In this respect, the UEFA Executive Committee is empowered to issue
disciplinary regulations setting out the procedures for the administration of justiceand disciplinary rules.2
Disciplinary measures may be imposed for unsportsmanlike conduct,
violations of the Laws of the Game, and contravention of UEFA’s Statutes, rules
and regulations, decisions and directives.3
Indeed, a clearly defined list of disciplinary measures imposable against
member associations, clubs and individuals is to be found in the UEFA Statutes4
and in the Disciplinary Regulations (“DR”).5

4.5 Racism and Discriminatory Conduct – 5. Disciplinary Proceedings –5.1 Proceedings Before the CEDB – 5.2 Proceedings Before the AB –5.3 Disciplinary Measures – 5.4 Statute of Limitations – 6. Selected Features –6.1 Pro Bono Counsel – 6.2 Communication and Transparency – 6.3 Enforcementof Decisions – 7. The Club Financial Control Body (CFCB) – 7.1 Key Concepts– 7.1.1 Overdue Payables – 7.1.2 Break-Even & Settlement Agreements –7.2 Financial Fair Play 2.0 – 7.2.1 UEFA Club Licensing and Financial Sustainability
Regulations 2022 – 7.2.2 Double Instance CFCB Proceedings – 8. Relationshipwith CAS – 8.1 Expedited Proceedings Before CAS – 9. Conclusion

2.
1.

INTRODUCTION

1.1

Statutes & Regulatory Framework

The supreme controlling organ of UEFA is the Congress which is ordinarily held
annually and its regulatory power is principally exercised in the adoption of theUEFA Statutes. Swiss law does not include a specific set of regulations on thegovernance of sports organisations. Autonomy is granted to clubs, federations
and associations, which means sports bodies are responsible for their own
governance. As such, Swiss associations are free to set their own rules as to theirstructure and the functioning of the internal bodies, the rights and obligations of
their members and the settlement of internal disputes.1____________________

M. BADDELEY, The extraordinary autonomy of sports bodies under Swiss law: lessons tobe drawn. The International Sports Law Journal, 2020, vol. 20, no. 1-2, 4.

1

TEASER

Founded in 1954, the Union des Associations Européennes de Football (UEFA)is the governing body of European football. One of six confederations recognised
by FIFA, it is an association of associations, and is the umbrella organisation for
55 national member associations across Europe. UEFA is a society entered in
the register of companies under the Swiss Civil Code (SCC), and is neutral,
politically and religiously with headquarters located in Nyon, Switzerland.
This chapter focuses on the workings of UEFA’s Organs for the
Administration of Justice with a particular focus on the disciplinary bodies.
In an average season, these bodies issue approximately 900 disciplinary decisions.
Perhaps the best accolade attesting to the proper functioning of this disciplinary
framework and the quality of the justice dispended is the fact that only alimited number of decisions are ultimately appealed to the Court of Arbitrationfor Sport (CAS).

607

ORGANS FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE

The organs through which UEFA may act are (i) the Congress; (ii) the Executive
Committee; (iii) the President; and (iv) the Organs for the Administrationof Justice.6
UEFA’s Organs for the Administration of Justice are made up of theControl, Ethics and Disciplinary Body (“CEDB”), the Appeals Body (“AB”),
Ethics and Disciplinary Inspectors (“EDIs”) and the Club Financial Control
Body (“CFCB”).
In our consideration and analysis of UEFA’s disciplinary bodies, ourfocus is predominantly on the CEDB and AB which deal with the application of
the DR and have the power to impose disciplinary measures.7 Whereas EDIs
also have a very prominent role before the CEDB and AB and in the applicationof the DR, they cannot impose disciplinary measures. By contrast, the CFCB
can impose disciplinary measures but is concerned with the assessment ofcompliance with regulations in the fields of club licencing and financial sustainability.
The delineation of competencies of the CEDB and AB on one side and the
CFCB on the other are relatively straightforward and express provisions exist to
deal with occasions where they could potentially overlap.8
A common thread across the Organs for the Administration of Justice isthat the members are independent and may not belong to any other organ orcommittee of UEFA. They are elected by the Executive Committee for a term offour years and are presented to the Congress for ratification.
[…]____________________

UEFA Statutes, Art. 56.
UEFA Statutes, Art. 52.
4UEFA Statutes, Artt. 53 and 54.
5
DR, Art. 6.
6UEFA Statutes, Art. 11.
7UEFA Statutes, Art. 57.
8
Procedural Rules governing the UEFA Club Financial Control Body, Art. 2(3) DR andArt. 5.03.
2
3

INTERNATIONAL SPORTS JUSTICE

636

1.

STRUCTURE AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION SYSTEM OF THEFÉDÉRATION INTERNATIONALE DE GYMNASTIQUE (FIG):
AN INSIDE LEGAL PERSPECTIVE
by Vincent Jäggi and Riccardo Coppa*

SUMMARY: 1. Introduction – 2. General Structure of the FIG – 2.1 FIG Membership– 2.2 FIG Governing Bodies – 2.2.1 Congress – 2.2.2 Executive Bodies –2.2.3 Other Internal Bodies – 3. Gymnastics Ethics Foundation (GEF) – 3.1 Swiss
Legal Framework for Foundations (Overview) – 3.2 Objectives – 3.3 Governance– 3.4 Organisation – 3.4.1 Safeguarding Section – 3.4.2 Disciplinary Section –3.4.3 Compliance Section – 4. Disciplinary Proceedings – 4.1 Rules –4.2 Infringements – 4.3 Proceedings – 4.4 Sanctions and Enforcement –5. Access to the CAS – 5.1 CAS Jurisdiction on Appeals Against “Decisions”
Rendered by the GEF – 5.2 CAS Jurisdiction on “Disputes” Within the FIG –6. Conclusive Remarks____________________Dr Vincent Jäggi, LL.M., is a Swiss qualified attorney-at-law, partner at Kellerhals Carrard,
Lausanne (Switzerland) and lecturer in several post-graduate programmes, including
at the “International Academy of Sport Science and Technology” (AISTS),
Lausanne (Switzerland).
Riccardo Coppa is a Swiss qualified attorney-at-law, senior associate at Kellerhals Carrard,
Lausanne (Switzerland).

*TEASERA BSTRACT: The present chapter gives an inside legal perspective into thestructure of the Fédération Internationale de Gymnastique (FIG).
In particular, this paper aims to present the Gymnastics Ethics Foundation(GEF), an independent legal entity founded by the FIG in 2018 which strives
to uphold safety and fairness in the sport of gymnastics and is notably incharge of the dispute resolution system in international gymnastics.

Vincent Jäggi and Riccardo Coppa

INTRODUCTION

The Fédération Internationale de Gymnastique (hereinafter the “FIG”) was
founded in 18811 and is incorporated as an association governed by Art. 60
et seq. of the Swiss Civil Code (hereinafter the “SCC”), with its registered seatin Lausanne, Switzerland.
It is the governing body of gymnastics worldwide. In particular, theFIG governs the following disciplines: Men’s and Women’s Artistic Gymnastics,
Rhythmic Gymnastics, Aerobic Gymnastics, Acrobatic Gymnastics, Trampoline
Gymnastics and Gymnastics for All (which also includes Gymnaestrada, i.e.
general gymnastics without competitions).2 Since 2017, a new discipline, i.e.
Parkour, has also been recognised within the FIG.3
As a threshold remark, it should be noted that the 84th FIG Congress,
held in Istanbul (Turkey) on 11-12 November 2022, approved a revised versionof the FIG statutes which entered into force on 1st January 2023 (hereinafter the“FIG Statutes”).4 The present contribution, therefore, makes reference to this
newly adopted version of the FIG Statutes.5
After this short introduction (Section 1), the present chapter will be
structured as follows: Section 2 will give a general overview of the internal structureof the FIG, in particular its members and internal bodies; Section 3 will introduce
the Gymnastics Ethics Foundation (hereinafter the “GEF”), an independent legal
entity founded by the FIG to safeguard athletes and participants in gymnastics
from harassment and abuse, to promote and supervise ethical principles ingymnastics, and to deal with disciplinary and ethics procedures; Section 4 will
examine the disciplinary proceedings within the FIG and Section 5 will analyse
the access to the CAS contained in the FIG Statutes and its internal regulations;finally, Section 6 will contain some conclusive remarks.
____________________

On 23 July 1881, the “Fédération Européenne de Gymnastique” was founded in Liège(Belgium) and originally comprised three member federations (i.e. Belgium, France and theNetherlands). This organisation became the FIG in 1921.
2
Among the gymnastics disciplines governed by the FIG, currently three of them (i.e.
Artistic, Rhythmics and Trampoline Gymnastics) are admitted within the official programme
for Paris 2024 Olympic Games.
3
The FIG Statutes define Parkour as a “competitive sport (outdoors and indoors) consistingof using urban equipment for a timed run or a run with style”. The first FIG Parkour WorldChampionships took place in Tokyo on 14-16 October 2022.
4
The FIG Statutes are publicly available on the FIG official website:
https://www.gymnastics.sport/site/rules/.
5
For the sake of transparency, the undersigned authors contributed as external legal
advisors to the drafting of this new edition of the FIG Statutes.
1

GYMNASTICS – FIG

2.

GENERAL STRUCTURE OF THE FIG

2.1

FIG Membership____________________

Cf. FIG Statutes, Art. 23.1.
The revised version of the FIG Statutes clarifies that the term “country” refers “to anindependent state recognised by the international community and having its National
Olympic Committee (NOC) recognised by the International Olympic Committee (IOC)”.
This definition is based on the notion contained in the Rule 30 (1) of the Olympic Charter(in force as from 8 August 2021).
8
FIG Statutes, Art. 21. Such article provides that “[a]ffiliated Member Federations shall
pay an Annual Membership Fee, comprising a base affiliation fee which includes
Gymnastics for All activities, plus increments charged for any additional discipline”.
7

THE IHF AND EHF JUSTICE SYSTEMS
by Michele Colucci* and Monika Flixeder**TEASERThe FIG consists of national federations that govern the sport of gymnastics
within their countries (hereinafter “Member Federations”). Art. 3 of the FIG
Statutes defines two specific categories of membership: “affiliated” Member
Federations and “associated” Member Federations.
According to the well-known Ein-platz-prinzip, which is enshrined inArt. 4.2 of the FIG Statutes, only one Member Federation can be “recognised”
per country.6 In order to be admitted to the FIG as an “affiliated” member
representing a country,7 the concerned federation must “control [g]ymnastics”
in that country and must also be recognised by both the “national governmental
authority responsible for Physical Education and/or Sport” and by the relevant
National Olympic Committee (NOC). In addition, each Member Federationmust satisfy other requirements established at Art. 4.2 of the FIG Statutes,
such as having “a minimum of three (3) gymnastics clubs and twenty (20)
gymnasts / athletes”.
“Affiliated” Member Federations are members “with afull membership”. Their rights are listed in Art. 5.1 of the FIG Statutes andinclude, in particular, the right to vote and submit proposals to the FIG Congress,
make nominations for the elected positions and participate in FIG events andcompetitions. They also have obligations provided in Art. 5.2 of the FIG Statutes,
which include the requirement to pay an “Annual Membership Fee”8 and,more generally, to fulfil all financial obligations owed to the FIG; Member
Federations must also fully comply with the FIG rules as well as any decision
issued by the FIG or the GEF. In addition, “affiliated” Member Federations are
required to remain independent, in particular from any political interference andmust actively safeguard athletes, gymnasts, and all other participants in gymnastics
from any kind of harassment and abuse.
By contrast, “associated” Member Federations have “restrictive” rights
and obligations; in particular, they are not allowed to vote or submit proposals[…]
6

INTERNATIONAL SPORTS JUSTICE

637

A BSTRACT: The Authors analyse the legal system of both the International
and European Handball Federations highlighting their main peculiarities interms of jurisdiction, sanctions and enforcement of legal decisions.
Particular attention is given to the judicial system that the European Handball
Federation put in place in order to adapt to the needs of handballstakeholders and ensure an efficient and fast way of dispute resolution. The
system consists of two stages of appeal and an external Handball Court of
Arbitration. Having been in existence for thirty years, the EHF used best
efforts to implement and establish a legal system adopted to the handballstakeholders’ needs in order to resolve disputes efficiently.

SUMMARY: I. The International Handball Federation – 1. Introduction – 1.1 The
IHF Members and Their Obligations – 1.2 The IHF Bodies – 1.3 The IHF
Adjudicating Bodies and CAS – 2. Jurisdiction – 2.1 The IHF Appeal Authorities
on Disciplinary Matters – 2.1.1 The IHF Disciplinary Commission – 2.1.2 The
Jury – 3. The Arbitration Commission and the Arbitration Tribunal for Disputes
About “Business Activities” – 4. The Proceedings and Execution of Judgements– 5. The IHF Ethics Commission and the Ethics Code – 6. “Sport Public Order”
and Principle of Zero Tolerance – II. The European Handball Federation –1. Introduction – 2. Judicial Bodies – 2.1 The EHF Legal Bodies – 2.1.1 Common
Provisions – 2.1.2 Provisions Relating to the EHF Court of Handball –2.1.3 Provisions Relating to the EHF Court of Appeal – 2.2 Administrative Bodies– 2.3 On Site-Bodies – 3. Categories of Decisions – 3.1 Classic Disputes in the
Field of Sports – 3.1.1 Disciplinary Proceedings – 3.1.2 Transfer Disputes –____________________

President of the Council of the European Handball Court of Arbitration and Member ofthe Dispute Resolution Chamber of the FIFA Football Tribunal.
**
Legal and Euro Events Senior Director of the European Handball Federation.
*

660

Michele Colucci and Monica Flixeder

HANDBALL – IHF – EHF

Violation of the above-mentioned obligations by any Member
Federation shall be subject to sanction.7

3.1.3 Education Compensation – 3.1.3.1 Competitions-Related Disputes –3.1.3.2 Withdrawal of Clubs in Relation to Covid-19 – 3.1.4 Marketing Related
Disputes in Handball – 4. Political Crisis Following the Russian Invasion in Ukraine– 5. The European Handball Court of Arbitration – 6. Conclusions

I.
1.

INTRODUCTION

The IHF Members and Their Obligations

The IHF is composed of the national handball federations on which it has bestowed
recognition and which “control handball in their country”.4
The National Federations (hereafter also referred as“Member Federations”) also form Continental Confederations, based on
geographical location.
The National Federations’ statutes, in conformity with the IHF standard
statutes, need to contain some mandatory provisions which reflect also theMember Federations’ obligations.
As such, Member Federations need to ensure: (i) permanent compliancewith the Statutes, Regulations and decisions of the IHF and of the Continental
Confederation concerned; (ii) compliance with the Rules of the Game applicable;(iii) recognition of the IHF adjudicating bodies and Court of Arbitration for Sportin Lausanne; (iv) Independent management of their missions and guarantee that
their own affairs are not influenced by any third parties;5 full compliance with allother duties arising from these Statutes and other Regulations.6____________________IHF Statutes, Art. 1.
2
Ibidem.
3
IHF Statutes, Art. 2.
4Idem, Art. 8.
5Idem, Art. 8.2.
6Idem, Art. 8.3.
1

The IHF Bodies

Pursuant to Art. 12 of the IHF Statutes the highest IHF body is the Congress
while the Council and the Executive Committee are the IHF executive bodies.
The IHF has its Head Office and some permanent Commissions andworking groups constitute Executive Committee’s technical bodies.
A supervisory body and the internal IHF auditors shall check financial
matters. They audit financial reports and assure the compliance of these reports
with Swiss Law and international accounting standards.
1.3

TEASER

1.1

1.2

THE INTERNATIONAL HANDBALL FEDERATIONThe International Handball Federation (IHF) is a non-profit sports association
as described in art. 60 ff of the Swiss Civil Code (ZGB).1 The IHF has its
headquarters in Basel which is also the place of jurisdiction and it is subject toSwiss law.2 Its Statutes and Regulations as well as the IHF decisions are binding
on its members.3

661

The IHF Adjudicating Bodies and CAS

The IHF adjudicating bodies are the Disciplinary Commission, the Jury, theArbitration Commission, the Arbitration Tribunal, the Ethics Commission andthey have legal authority.8
The Arbitration Commission and the Arbitration Tribunal are the twomain adjudicating bodies while the Disciplinary Commission and the Jury are
active only during sports events.
In the case of disputes concerning the IHF Statutes, the regulations andthe resolutions of IHF bodies, officials and players, as well as the Member
Federations to which they belong, are subject exclusively to the sports jurisdictionof the IHF’s statutory adjudicating bodies.
Pursuant to the Statutes, the Continental Confederations and National
Federations agree to fully comply with any decisions passed by the relevant IHF
adjudicating bodies.
Moreover, they have the obligation to take every precaution necessary
to ensure that their own members, players and officials comply withthese decisions.
According to Art. 23 IHF Statutes all disputes arising from theRegulations are handled by the IHF legal (rectius adjudicating) bodies.
[…]____________________

Ibidem. The Council shall be entitled to suspend any stakeholders that seriously andrepeatedly violate their obligations as members with immediate effect until thenext Congress. The Council shall give the opportunity to the members concernedto present their arguments and give them the benefit of the doubt until the memberspresent their defense to the Council, after which the Council may revoke the decision andlift the suspension.
8
IHF Statutes, Art. 22.
7

INTERNATIONAL SPORTS JUSTICE688

AN OVERVIEW OF THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION SYSTEMWITHIN THE FIM
by Vincent Jäggi and Riccardo Coppa*

ABSTRACT: The present contribution wishes to give a general overview of

SUMMARY: 1. Introduction – 2. Rules – 3. Bodies – 3.1 “On-Field” Bodies –3.1.1 FIM Regulations – 3.1.2 MotoGP Regulations – 3.2 “Off-Field” Bodies –3.2.1 FIM Regulations – 3.2.2 MotoGP Regulations – 4. Proceedings –4.1 Right to Protest – 4.2 Right to Appeal – 4.3 Procedural Guarantees –5. Penalties – 6. The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) – 7. Conclusive Remarks

1.

INTRODUCTION

The Fédération Internationale de Motocyclisme (hereinafter the “FIM”) is anassociation under Article 60 et seq. of the Swiss Civil Code (hereinafter
the “SCC”) incorporated in Switzerland, with its registered headquarters in____________________Dr Vincent Jäggi, LL.M., is a Swiss qualified attorney-at-law, partner at Kellerhals Carrard,
Lausanne (Switzerland) and lecturer in several post-graduate programmes, including
at the “International Academy of Sport Science and Technology” (AISTS),
Lausanne (Switzerland).
Riccardo Coppa is a Swiss qualified attorney-at-law, senior associate at Kellerhals Carrard,
Lausanne (Switzerland).

*TEASERthe dispute resolution system within the Fédération Internationale deMotocyclisme (FIM). The contribution is principally focused on thedisciplinary proceedings in relation with offences or misconducts occurring
during the competitions organised under the FIM authority.

Vincent Jäggi and Riccardo Coppa

Mies (Canton of Vaud). The FIM is the governing body for “motorcycle sports”
and has the authority to govern “all matters connected with motorcycling
activities” throughout the world.
According to the FIM Statutes and By-Laws (hereinafter the “FIM
Statutes”),1 the FIM is “the supreme and sole international authority
empowered to control international motorcycling events organised under
its jurisdiction throughout the world” and acts as internal “supreme court forthe settlement of disputes” which may arise from the organisation of suchmotorcycling activities, subject to the cases that, according to its own regulations,
may ultimately be submitted to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).
Like most of the other international sports federations, the FIM has
established its own internal dispute resolution mechanism which mainly concerns(vertical) disciplinary disputes as opposed to (horizontal) contractual disputes
which are not governed by FIM regulations.Therefore, in the present contribution,
the analysis will be focused on the applicable disciplinary rules (Section 2, below),the bodies which have jurisdiction to hear disciplinary cases (Section 3, below),the disciplinary proceedings (Section 4, below) and the penalties provided by
the regulations and their enforcement (Section 5, below). As is “typical” in thedispute resolution systems in sports,2 the FIM regulations also contain arbitration
clauses in favour of CAS which will be addressed in a specific section of thepresent contribution (Section 6, below). The chapter will end with some conclusive
remarks (Section 7, below).
2.

RULES

The disciplinary rules of the FIM are mainly included in the FIM Disciplinary andArbitration Code (hereinafter the “FIM Disciplinary Code”),3 i.e. a set of rules
approved by the FIM Board of Directors defining the FIM disciplinary bodies,
the punishable acts, the disciplinary procedures and the sanctions which may be
imposed.4 According to the FIM Disciplinary Code, the FIM has the power toimpose “penalties” in case of infringements of FIM regulations committed byany holders of a FIM licence.5 In addition, the FIM licence also contains the firm____________________The FIM Statutes and By-Laws (version 2022), as modified on 3 December 2021.
In a judgment involving precisely the FIM, the Swiss Federal Tribunal qualified as“branchentypisch” the arbitration clause in favour of the CAS in the sports industry;
cf. judgement of the Swiss Federal Tribunal 4A_314/2017 of 28 May 2018, FIM v. Kuwait
Motor Sports Club, para. 2.3.1.
3
The FIM Disciplinary and Arbitration Code (edition 2022).
4
FIM Statutes, Art. 16.
5
The FIM Sporting Code (edition 2022), Art. 70. In particular, Art. 70 (2) states that “[t]he
FIM Licence is the document necessary for any individual or corporate entity wishing to
1
2

MOTORCYCLISM – FIM

INTERNATIONAL SPORTS JUSTICE

689____________________

participate in any capacity in the meetings organised under the authority of the FIM
and/or the CONUs [i.e. Continental Unions recognised by the FIM]”.
6
FIM Sporting Code, Art. 10.
7
Cf. Decision of the International Disciplinary Court of 9 September 2022, concerning the
Spanish trial racer Adam Raga.
8
At the beginning of the FIM Disciplinary Code it is expressly stated that “[f]or all
disciplinary provisions relative to the Circuit Racing World Championship Grand Prix,
Superbike, Supersport World Championships and Superstock FIM Cup as well as
the Motocross and Supercross World Championships, please refer to therespective Regulations”.
9
The FIM Grand Prix World Championship Regulations (2023 edition), as amended on
17 January 2023.
10
The FIM Superbike, SuperSport & SuperSport 300 World Championships Regulations(edition 2022), as updated on 23 March 2022.

INTERNATIONAL RUGBY JUSTICE:
THE WORLD RUGBY JUDICIAL SYSTEM
by Susan Ahern FCIArb* and Yvonne Nolan**

TEASER(contractual) commitment by any licence holders “to submit to and be boundby all the rules and regulations of the FIM”, including disciplinary rules and“not to take part in any capacity whatsoever, in any motorcycle competition
not authorised by such rules and regulations”.
Moreover, the FIM has enacted rules that specifically govern disciplines,
competitions and sporting events (referred as “meetings” in the FIM regulations)6
organised under its jurisdiction. These rules may also contain, inter alia, disciplinary
provisions applying to specific disciplines or events, such as the FIM WorldChampionships, and thus deviate from the general provisions contained in the
FIM Disciplinary Code. The interaction between the FIM Disciplinary Codeand these specific rules is not always self-evident; however, as a matter of principle,
specific provisions governing a defined discipline or event shall prevail over thegeneral provisions contained in the FIM Disciplinary Code.7 As a result, theFIM Disciplinary Code generally applies if special regulations do not provide
otherwise or if, for some disciplines or events, the FIM has not adopted specificdisciplinary rules.8
Among the specific rules for motorcycling disciplines or events, it shouldbe mentioned the FIM Grand Prix World Championship Regulations (hereinafter
the “MotoGP Regulations”)9 or the FIM Superbike, Supersport & SuperSport
300 World Championships (hereinafter the “Superbike Regulations”).10 The
peculiarity of these regulations is that they are the result of a close cooperation
between the FIM and Dorna Sports S.L. (hereinafter “Dorna”), a limited company
based in Spain organizing and exploiting the commercial rights of the MotoGp
and Superbike Championships.
In particular, the MotoGP Regulations establish a “Permanent Bureau”
composed by two representatives appointed by both FIM and Dorna, and a“Grand Prix Commission” which includes, in addition to members from FIM and[…]

ABSTRACT: World Rugby is the governing body of Rugby Union, establishedin 1886. This chapter provides an overview of the current system of judicial
and disciplinary laws and regulations (the Rugby Regulations) that apply
within the sport. It draws together the universality of the Rugby Regulations
and provides an insight into how those Regulations are applied by the
independent judiciary in a global context.

SUMMARY: 1. Introduction – 2. The Judicial Structure – 2.1 World Rugby Judicial
and Disciplinary Panel – 2.2 Initiation of Proceedings – 3. On-Field discipline –3.1 A Rugby Specific Regime – 3.2 Sanctions for Foul Play – 3.3 Core Sanctioning
Process – 4. Misconduct and Code of Conduct – 5. Anti-Corruption and Betting –6. Anti-Doping – 7. Eligibility – 8. General – Disputes and Mediation – 9. Conclusion

1.

INTRODUCTION

The origins of the Game of Rugby Union (“Rugby/Game”) emerged from an actof spirited defiance when, at Rugby School in 1823, William Webb Ellis pickedup the ball during a game of soccer and ran with it.1 Today, his name and legend____________________

Susan Ahern, Barrister-at-Law, CAS Arbitrator and Independent Judicial Chair of World
Wheelchair Rugby.
**
Yvonne Nolan, General Counsel, Federation, World Rugby.
1
See World Rugby Charter, Principles of the Game, available on line athttps://www.world.rugby/the-game/laws/charter/introduction.
*

704

Susan Ahern and Yvonne Nolan

2.

THE JUDICIAL STRUCTURE

Independence, neutrality and expertise are core requirements for appointees whocarry out judicial responsibilities on behalf of the World Rugby. By extension
World Rugby member Unions are mandated to emulate this fundamental tenet in
all appropriate areas of their domestic processes. The core World Rugby
Regulations dealing with disciplinary and judicial matters set out the foundation
structure supporting the appointment of independent judicial personnel. The
functions and powers of the independent judiciary and the general principles
which they should apply in the course of their appointment and the exercise of____________________

Together referred to the “Values”.
The World Rugby Regulations Relating to the Game support the Laws of the Game andcan be found at https://www.world.rugby/organisation/governance/regulations/reg-1.
2
3

705

their duties are also delineated. Notwithstanding this, they retain a high degree of
discretion in the exercise of those powers.4 While long a feature ofWorld Rugby Regulations, the present structure was put in place in 1995 as theGame turned professional.
2.1

TEASER

live on as the Webb Ellis Cup is presented to the champions of the sport at thequadrennial Rugby World Cup tournament, the pinnacle event for the traditional
form of the Game. Variations of the Game have also developed over time, including
Rugby Sevens, an Olympic sport since 2016. Wheelchair Rugby has also emerged
as an important Paralympic discipline for the sport under the auspices of theWorld Wheelchair Rugby international federation.
World Rugby is the international federation that governs the Game of
Rugby Union but is also a global movement comprising more than 500 million
fans and 10 million players within more than 120 national member federations.
World Rugby has a clear mission to grow the Game, in the context of its Values:
integrity, passion, solidarity, discipline and respect.2 “Discipline” is specificallyimportant in a physical contact sport and this chapter explores the judicial systemthat underpins and governs the application of discipline across the Game anddelves into some key areas which are fundamental to upholding World Rugby’s
Bye-Laws and Regulations Relating to the Game (“World Rugby Regulations”).3
The World Rugby Regulations cover all matters relating to the proper
governance and administration of the sport including, inter alia, eligibility andsporting nationality, advertising around the playing pitch, technical equipment
specifications, betting and anti-corruption, agents, anti-doping, player releaseand conduct: both on-field and off-field. The World Rugby Bye-Laws deal withthe governance structure of the organisation, the establishment of committees,
their roles, powers and responsibilities, while the Laws of the Game deal entirely
with on-field matters including the rules of the sport and prohibitions on foul play.
The Bye-Laws and Laws of the Game are not considered within the scope of
this paper save to deal with the off-field consequences of foul play as addressedin Section 3 and where appropriate to provide context.

RUGBY – WORLD RUGBYWorld Rugby Judicial and Disciplinary Panel

The World Rugby Council, which is the supreme decision-making body of World
Rugby, appoints individuals to a panel – the Judicial and Disciplinary Panel –whose members are drawn from nominations from the individual national member
Unions and Regional Associations. The World Rugby Council considers all suchnominees for appointment against specified Appointment Criteria5 before making
relevant appointments to the Panel which sits in various compositions. Appointed
Disciplinary Committees/Judicial Officers deal with foul play issues only, while
Judicial Committees/Judicial Officers deal with all other judicial matters including
breaches of the World Rugby Regulations and Bye-Laws.
The Judicial and Disciplinary Panel members are eligible to sit in a variety
of set roles, depending on their specific appointment, as Judicial Officers,
Appeal Officers6 or Panel Members7 on Disciplinary and/or Judicial Committees
and appointments are for a period of up to four years.8
The World Rugby Council appoints a Judicial Panel Chair9 who acts as
the chairperson of the Judicial and Disciplinary Panel (the “Panel”). The Judicial
Panel Chair position is independent of the executive and governing arms of World
Rugby. Where the Regulations are breached / activated such that appointments
to Disciplinary or Judicial Committees are required, the Judicial Panel Chair makes
appointments from the Panel.10 The Judicial Panel Chair also has the power toco-opt additional persons with specialist skills and experience to sit on individual
Judicial Committees to deal with cases that require such specialist skills
and experience.11[…]____________________

See World Rugby Regulation 20: https://www.world.rugby/organisation/governance/
regulations/reg-20.
5Set out in Appendix 1 to Regulation 20.
6
Appeal Officers/Committees hear and decide appeals from decisions of Judicial Officers/
Committees and Disciplinary Committees.
7
Panel Members are non-lawyers with rugby-specific knowledge and experience appointed
to Judicial Tribunals.
8
See Regulation 20.2.
9
The Judicial Panel Chair is selected using criteria set out in Regulation 20, Appendix 1.
10The Judicial Panel Chair may be assisted by the Judicial and Disciplinary Panel
Appointments Committee, see Regulation 20.2.3.
11
See Regulation 20.2.6.
4

INTERNATIONAL SPORTS JUSTICE

734

THE JUSTICE SYSTEM OF THE INTERNATIONALTENNIS FEDERATION
by Despina Mavromati *SUMMARY: 1. Introduction – 1.1 The ITF Members and Their Obligations –1.2 The ITF Bodies – 2. Jurisdiction and ITF Adjudicating Bodies –2.1 ITF-Related Disputes, Applicable Law, Language and Place of the Hearing –2.2 ITF Adjudicating Bodies – 2.3 The ITF Internal Adjudication Panel –2.3.1 Introduction – 2.3.2 ITF Adjudication Panel Acting as a First-instance Panel– 2.3.3 ITF Adjudication Panel Acting as an Appeals or Supervisory Panel –____________________

Dr. iur, LL.M., M.B.A., FCIArb. Attorney-at-law, BianchiSchwald LLC and Lecturer at the
Law Faculty of the University of Lausanne, Member of the ITF Independent Tribunal, theUEFA Appeals Body, the GEF Disciplinary Tribunal, the World Athletics Disciplinary
Tribunal and former Chair of the Ethics and Disciplinary Commission of the International
Weightlifting Federation (IWF).
*

TEASERA BSTRACT : The Author analyses the dispute resolution system of theInternational Tennis Federation (ITF) through its various decision-making
bodies and examines issues related to jurisdiction, applicable law,composition of its members, sanctions and enforcement of its decisions.
Unlike other major international Olympic federations that are based in
Switzerland, the ITF is seated in London (UK) and its major decision-making
body, namely the ITF Independent Tribunal, is administered by Sport
Resolutions, an independent case management organization based in
London (UK). The ITF has also delegated its doping-control and education
responsibilities and its monitoring and prosecution of anti-corruption offences
to an independent organization (International Tennis Integrity Agency). To
the extent that the ITF is an Olympic International Federation, it has adopted
the mandatory provisions of the World Anti-Doping Code and therefore its
doping-related decisions can be appealed exclusively to the Court of
Arbitration for Sport (CAS).

Despina Mavromati

2.3.4 Appeals Against Decisions of the ITF Adjudication Panel Acting as aFirst-Instance Panel – 2.3.5 Types of Disputes Falling Under the Jurisdiction of
the ITF Adjudication Panel – 2.4 The ITF Independent Tribunal – 2.4.1 Introduction
and General Provisions on the Independent Tribunal – 2.4.2 ITF Independent
Tribunal Acting as a First-Instance Panel – 2.4.3 ITF Independent Tribunal Acting
as an Appeals Tribunal – 2.4.4 ITF Independent Tribunal Acting as a Supervisory
Jurisdiction – 2.4.5 Appeals Against Decisions of the ITF Independent Tribunal –2.4.6 Types of Cases Decided by the ITF Independent Tribunal – 3. The
International Tennis Integrity Agency (ITIA) – 3.1 Introduction – 3.2 The Tennis
Anti-Doping Program (TADP) – 3.2.1 Introduction and Purpose of the TADP –3.2.2 Investigations, Referral and Hearing Before the Independent Tribunal –3.2.3 Single Hearing Before the CAS and Appeals Against the Independent
Tribunal Decisions to the CAS – 3.3 The Tennis Anti-Corruption Program –3.3.1 Introduction and Goals of the TACP – 3.3.2 Investigations, Referral andHearing Before the Anti-Corruption Hearing Officer (AHO) – 3.3.3 Types ofCases Decided Under the TACP jurisdiction – 3.3.4 Appeals Against AHO
Decisions to the CAS – 3.4 The ITF Code of Ethics and the Ethics Commission –3.4.1 The ITF Ethics Commission – 3.4.2 The Procedure Before the ITF Ethics
Commission– 3.4.3 Appeals Against the ITF Ethics Commission Decisions to the
ITF Independent Tribunal and then to the CAS – 4. Conclusions

1.

INTRODUCTION

The International Tennis Federation is the governing body of world tennis,
wheelchair tennis and beach tennis and has its headquarters in London, UK.
It consists of the ITF Limited (which is registered in the Bahamas and is referredherein as the “ITF”) and the ITF Licensing UK Limited (registered in Englandand Wales). The ITF is the world governing body for the sport of tennis and istasked, among others, with fostering the growth and development of the sport oftennis at the global level, and it may draft or amend rules related to tennis.1
According to Article IV (m) and (o) of the ITF Constitution, the ITF
must also preserve the integrity and independence of tennis and pursue its goals
without unfair discrimination. Unlike the majority of international sports federations
that are structured as “associations (pursuant to Art. 60 ff. of the Swiss Civil
Code), the “ITF Limited” is structured as a company registered in the Bahamas
while the ITF is merely an unincorporated body.2____________________
1
2

ITF Constitution 2022, Art. IV, which lists all the objectives and purposes of the ITF.
Idem, Art. 1.

TENNIS – ITF

1.1

INTERNATIONAL SPORTS JUSTICE

735

The ITF Members and Their Obligations

The ITF is composed of the national tennis associations (“National Federations”)
as “Class B Members”: they are entitled to attend, speak and vote at the ITF
General Meeting.3 National Federations must be properly constituted sports
bodies under the law applicable in their country of seat,4 which must also berecognized by the International Olympic Committee (IOC).5 Additionally, theusual one-member-per-country rule applies to the ITF.6
The ITF Constitution has detailed provisions not only on the suspension
or expulsion of National Federations, but also on their readmittance.7 The sameprovisions indirectly delineate the obligations of such National Federations, which
include, but are not limited to, the protection of the sport of tennis in their country,
the adequate representation of the game in their country / territory and the paymentof their membership fees.
The ITF Bodies

Pursuant to Art. 12 of the ITF Constitution the ITF is governed by the
ITF Council, which is composed of the delegates of the Members assembled in
the General Meeting. The annual General Meeting must approve the minutes,
receive the annual report of the Board of Directory, receive the statement ofaccounts for the past financial year, and deal with other membership issues(including the election of the president and the board of directors).8
As to the Board of Directors, it consists of the President, fourteen otherpersons and two Athlete Representative Board members.9 The Board of Directors
is entrusted with the management of the ITF10 and may also delegate its power tosome Committees or Commissions, for a two-year term, and to which the
President is always a member without voting rights.11 The duties of the
ITF Committees and Commissions are enshrined in the Bye-Laws to[…]

by Stephen Bock*

TEASER

1.2

THE FÉDÉRATION INTERNATIONALE DE VOLLEYBALL’SDISPUTE RESOLUTION SYSTEM

ABSTRACT: This chapter examines the evolution of dispute resolution systems
within the FIVB over time. It provides an overview of the FIVB bodies, thecategories of disputes (“horizontal” and “vertical”) highlights how different
types of disputes (employment, financial, doping) are treated as well as therelevant jurisprudence related to offences and applicable sanctions sincethese bodies were developed.
The most substantial evolution since 2013 has occurred in the area of ethics
violations which now are decided by an independent decision-making bodyrather than merely an advisory body.
Through the examination of the relevant case law, the Author concludes thatthe relevant procedures before the FIVB disputes bodies have become
more accessible, transparent and efficient, while still maintaining its
volleyball-specificity.
SUMMARY: 1. Resolution of Disputes in International Volleyball Until 2012 –2. A New System, a New Era – 2.1 Main Principles – 2.1.1 CAS as the Ultimate
Appeals Body – 2.1.2 Categorisation of Disputes – 2.1.3 Principles of Natural
Justice – 2.2 “Horizontal” Disputes – 2.3 “Vertical” Disputes – 2.3.1 Disciplinary– 2.3.2 Doping – 2.3.3 Ethics – 2.3.4 Administrative – 2.3.4.1 Eligibility –2.3.4.2 Transfers – 2.4 Financial Disputes – 3. Conclusion____________________

Idem, Art. 2 (B) (a) and (d).
Idem, Art. 3 (a).
5
Idem, Art. 3 (e).
6
Idem, Art. 3 (l). The rule is subject to exceptions (and needs a decision of the 2/3 ofmajority resolution of the ITF council).
7
Idem, Art. 4 and Art. 5, respectively. See also Bye-Law to the ITF Constitution (2022),
Art. 7.
8
Idem, Art. 14.
9Idem, Art. 19.
10
Idem, Art. 22.
11
Idem, Art. 25 (b).
34____________________

L.L.M., Head of Legal and General Counsel, International Volleyball Federation, Lausanne,
Switzerland. This is an updated version of the article authored for the previous edition ofthis book by Dr. Achilleas Mavromatis, at the time, PhD in Sports Law, Attorney at Law.
Mavromatis Lawyers, Thessaloniki, Greece; President, Hellenic Volleyball Federation; Board
Member, European Volleyball Confederation (CEV); Secretary, FIVB Legal Commission(2006-2012); Member, FIVB Finance Commission (2012-) and Mr. Andreas Zagklis, LL.M.,
at the time, Attorney at Law (Greece) at Martens Rechtsanwälte with the support ofMs Diana Tesic, Barrister and Solicitor in Toronto, Canada. Therefore, most of the credit
for this contribution is due to them. The opinions expressed herein are those of the authorand do not necessarily reflect those of the FIVB.
*

756

1.

Stephen BockRESOLUTION OF DISPUTES IN INTERNATIONAL VOLLEYBALL UNTIL 2012____________________“Agreement relating to the constitution of the International Council of Arbitration forSport (ICAS)”, 22 June 1994, Paris, France. See http://www.tas-cas.org/en/arbitrage.asp/
4-3-294-1023-4-1-1/5-0-1023-3-0-0/.
2FIFA and FIVB were the only two IFs that signed the Paris Agreement with a reservation.
FIVB’s reservation signed by its then President Dr. Rubén Acosta, reads as follows:“En aucune façon, la seule signature de la Convention relative à la Constitution du
CIAS ne peut avoir pour effet de créer l’acceptation par la FIVB, de la juridiction
obligatoire du Tribunal Arbitral du Sport (TAS), conformément aux Artt. S1, S12, S20,
R27, R38, R39, R47, R48 et R52 du Code de l’arbitrage en matière de sport. Pour tout
litige concernant la FIVB, la juridiction compétente exclusive reste celle des organes dela FIVB, et notamment du Tribunal International du Volleyball, selon les termes de laConstitution de la FIVB approuvée par le Conseil d’Administration au mois d’avril
1994 pour présentation au Congrès Mondial de la FIVB. Enfin, la FIVB ne se considère
et ne sera pas liée par quelque décision en la matière qui pourrait être prise par le CIAS
ou les organisation membres de celui-ci y compris celles dont la FIVB serait elle-même
membre, en l’absence d’une décision précise du Congrès Mondial de la FIVB à cet
effet”. (Free Translation)“In no way, the mere signature of the Agreement relating to the constitution of the ICAS
can have the effect of creating the acceptance by the FIVB of the compulsory jurisdictionof the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), in accordance with Artt. S1, S12, S20, R27,
R38, R39, R47, R48 and R52 of the Code of Sports-related Arbitration. For any disputeconcerning the FIVB, the exclusive jurisdiction remains that of the FIVB bodies, and inparticular the International Volleyball Tribunal, according to the terms of the FIVB
Constitution approved by the Board of Directors in April 1994 for presentation to the
FIVB World Congress. Finally, the FIVB does not consider itself and will not be boundby any decision in this matter which could be taken by the ICAS or its member
organisations including those of which the FIVB itself is a member, in the absence of a
specific decision of the FIVB World Congress to this effect”.

TEASER

Historically, the Fédération Internationale de Volleyball (“FIVB”) managed its
own internal dispute resolution process aiming at preserving the sanctity of the
sport by having only those truly knowledgeable in volleyball resolve disputes
arising within the FIVB family. While the majority of international sporting
federations embraced the formation and the jurisdiction of the Court of Arbitrationfor Sport (“CAS”) as the ultimate judicial body for international sports disputes,
the FIVB originally resisted fully recognising its authority.
Although the FIVB signed the 1994 Paris Agreement establishing theInternational Council of Arbitration for Sport (“ICAS”), the independent
foundation created to manage the finances and administration of CAS,1 it did sounder an express reservation.2 Therefore, unlike the majority of International
Federations, the FIVB rejected the idea of being bound by CAS jurisdiction in
every respect. Instead of yielding to the authority of CAS, the FIVB created its
1

VOLLEYBALL – FIVB

757

own dispute resolution body, the International Volleyball Tribunal (“IVT”)3
in 1994. As of 2004, given that the FIVB is an international federation recognisedby the International Olympic Committee (“IOC”), the FIVB had a duty under
the Olympic Charter4 to adopt and implement the World Anti-Doping Code(“WADC”). The WADC stipulated CAS as the ultimate appeals body for doping
cases.5 As such, during that time, and up until 2012, CAS could hear only one
type of dispute in volleyball: doping cases. Refusing to abandon its own internal
dispute resolution mechanisms, all other disputes within the FIVB were heard
internally by the IVT.
The IVT was established to function as a neutral body, independent
from the governing and supporting institutions of the FIVB. In 2006, the former
FIVB President Dr. Rubén Acosta stated publicly his reservations with respect
to CAS and presented IVT:
“On the matter of arbitration, the FIVB has been reluctant to use theIOC-funded Court of Arbitration in Sport, except for anti-doping
appeals, preferring instead to refer all other cases to the International
Volleyball Tribunal (IVT). This is likely to continue for the time being.
The FIVB appreciates the importance of independent arbitration, but
believes that key improvements in the IVT may be a better way ofguaranteeing independent arbitration while maintaining confidence
that arbitrators fully understand Volleyball and Beach Volleyball, twoof the most successful team sports in the world. The International
Volleyball Tribunal is currently entirely financed by the FIVB and weare looking at bringing in another, independent source of finance. To
guarantee independence, we may also need to change the system ofelection of judges or arbitrators”.6
Interestingly, the IVT was structured in a way similar to CAS,
undertaking the role of impartial tribunal which could “arbitrate” disputes between
two or more parties under the jurisdiction of the FIVB (the Arbitration Chamber),and also as a court of appeal deciding cases against FIVB decisions, other thandecisions from the IVT itself (the Appeal Chamber).7 The IVT Members wereindividuals with a legal background proposed by the FIVB Board of[…]____________________

See FIVB Constitution (as applicable between 1994 and 2012); and see the Statutes of theInternational Volleyball Tribunal, which set out its jurisdiction and authority, structure,arbitration procedures and appeal procedures.
4
See Olympic Charter, Rule 25.
5
See WADC, Art. 13.
6
A. NAPIER, ‘A confident future for Volleyball and Beach Volleyball’, FIVB VolleyWorld,
September 2006, available at http://www.aanapier.com/confident.html.
7
See FIVB Constitution (2006), Art. 2.7.1.2.
3

INTERNATIONAL SPORTS JUSTICE

786

1.

DISPUTE RESOLUTION IN UNITED STATESPROFESSIONAL SPORTS LEAGUES
by Jeffrey A. Mishkin* and Danielle S. Menitove**

SUMMARY: 1. Introduction – 2. Federal Labour Law and Collective Bargaining –3. Commissioner Discipline and Arbitration – 3.1 Disciplinary Authority over Players– 3.1.1 Discipline for On-the-Field/Court/Ice Conduct – 3.1.2 Discipline for
Off-the-Field/Court/Ice Conduct – 3.2 Disciplinary Authority over Owners,
Managers, and Coaches – 4. Grievance Arbitration – 4.1 Non-Injury Grievances– 4.1.1 The “Lockout Pay” Case – 4.1.2 Appeals of Discipline for Out-of-Gameand Off-Court Conduct – 4.1.3 Anti-Doping Disputes – 4.2 Injury Grievances –5. System Arbitration – 6. Salary Arbitration – 7. Judicial Review – 8. Conclusion____________________

Arbitrator/Mediator; former head of the sports practice at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher& Flom LLP; former Executive Vice-President and Chief Legal Officer of the National
Basketball Association.
**
Arbitrator/Mediator; former attorney-at-law in the sports and antitrust practice groups
at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP.
*TEASER

ABSTRACT: This chapter provides an overview of the dispute resolution systems
employed by the four major professional sports leagues in the United States– the National Football League (NFL), the National Basketball Association(NBA), the National Hockey League (NHL), and Major League Baseball(MLB). The U.S. professional sports leagues do not recognize the jurisdictionof the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) to resolve their disputes. Instead,disputes are resolved using internal dispute resolution mechanisms set forthin the leagues’ collective bargaining agreements (CBAs) and Constitutions
and Bylaws. The primary types of dispute resolution procedures used by theleagues are arbitration before the Commissioner, grievance arbitration, system
arbitration, and, in the NHL and MLB, salary arbitration. Parties
occasionally seek to challenge the decisions arising from these internal
procedures in federal and state courts, but judicial review of arbitration
awards is limited and deferential.

Jeffrey A. Mishkin and Danielle S. Menitove

INTRODUCTION

In the United States, there are four major professional sports leagues – theNational Football League (“NFL”), the National Basketball Association (“NBA”),
the National Hockey League (“NHL”), and Major League Baseball (“MLB”).1
The leagues are private associations that do not accept the jurisdiction of the
Court of Arbitration for Sport (“CAS”) to resolve their disputes. Instead, theleagues and their respective constituents have entered into agreements governing
all aspects of their relationships, including the procedures for resolving
their disputes.
As discussed in detail below, each league has entered into a collective
bargaining agreement with the union representing players in the league setting
forth the disciplinary authority of the Commissioner, as well as the proceduresfor challenging disciplinary decisions and resolving other disputes. Although theprecise contours of each league’s dispute resolution systems differ, the myriad
disputes that arise in U.S. professional sports leagues generally are resolved
through one of four types of arbitration: (i) arbitration before the Commissioner,(ii) grievance arbitration, (iii) system arbitration, and (iv) in the NHL and MLB,salary arbitration.
2.

FEDERAL LABOUR LAW AND COLLECTIVE BARGAINING

In the United States, employees have the right to organize and be represented bya union under a federal law called the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”).2
Employees may form a union, or join an existing one, when the majority of
employees of a particular employer desire to be represented by a union. In suchcases, the employer can voluntarily recognize a union as the exclusive bargaining
representative based on evidence that a majority of employees wish to have theunion represent them. Alternatively, if the employer chooses not to voluntarily
recognize the union, the union can be certified as the exclusive bargaining
representative through a process and election overseen and administered by the
National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”).
Like other employees, professional athletes playing in the major
professional sports leagues in the United States have the right, and have chosen,
to be represented by unions for purposes of bargaining collectively with theirrespective leagues. Once the players choose to be represented by a union, the____________________

Major League Soccer (“MLS”) also has gained significant popularity as a professional
sports league in the United States since its founding in 1996. Given its more limited history,
however, MLS has produced fewer notable disputes and thus is not a focus of this chapter.
2
29 U.S.C. § 157.
1

NORTH AMERICAN LEAGUES____________________

29 U.S.C. § 158(d).
Idem.
5See Lockout Over Salary Cap Shuts Down NHL, ESPN.com (16 February 2005),
https://www.espn.com/nhl/news/story?id=1992793.
6
See Season Review: 2011-12, NBA.com (13 September 2021), https://www.nba.com/
news/history-season-review-2011-12.
7
See NFL Lockout Watch, Day 136: Sides Agree to Terms Early Monday Morning, Sports
Business Journal (25 July 2011), https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Daily/Issues/
2011/07/25/Leagues-and-Governing-Bodies/NFL-Lockout-Main.aspx.
8
See T. HUGHES, NHL Lockout Timeline: Let’s Remember the Whole Nightmare, SBNation(6 January 2013), https://www.sbnation.com/nhl/2013/1/6/3728892/nhl-lockout-timeline2012-2013.
9
See J. WAGNER , Play Ball! Lockout End as M.L.B. and Union Strike a Deal,
N.Y. Times (10 March 2022), https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/10/sports/baseball/mlblockout-ends.html.
10
See NFL Collective Bargaining Agreement (2020), available athttps://nflpaweb.blob.core.windows.net/media/Default/NFLPA/CBA2020/NFLNFLPA_CBA_March_5_2020.pdf; NBA Collective Bargaining Agreement (2017), available
at https://nbpa.com/cba; NHL Collective Bargaining Agreement (2012 and 2020),
4

THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM OF EUROLEAGUE BASKETBALL
by Andrea Fioravanti*

TEASER

league, acting as a multi-employer bargaining unit for the member teams, is required
to bargain with the union representing the players in that league over “wages,
hours, and other terms and conditions of employment”.3 Those topics – wages,
hours and other terms and conditions of employment – are known as “mandatory
subjects” of bargaining.
Although the labour laws require the parties to negotiate over the
mandatory subjects of bargaining, there is no obligation to reach an agreement or
make any concessions.4 If the parties fail to reach an agreement on a new collective
bargaining agreement (“CBA”) before the prior CBA expires, the league andplayers union may resort to their respective labour remedies of imposing a lockout
or strike to exert economic pressure on the other side to reach an agreement.
Over the last twenty years, each of the leagues has had work stoppages
because of labour disputes. In 2004-2005, a labour lockout in the NHL cancelled
the entire regular season and postseason, the first (and so far only) time a major
U.S. professional sports league has lost a full season due to a labour dispute.5
In 2011, NBA owners imposed a lockout that cancelled hundreds of games.6
The same year, NFL owners locked out the players for 136 days.7 In 2012,a 113-day lockout in the NHL resulted in the cancellation of 628 games.8 And in
2022, failed negotiations between MLB and MLB Players Association resulted
in a 99-day lockout and the delay of the opening game of the season.9
Eventually, the leagues and the unions always reach agreement on theterms of a new CBA. The CBAs each span several hundred pages and address
all aspects of the employment of players.10 The CBAs include terms regarding[…]
3

INTERNATIONAL SPORTS JUSTICE

787

ABSTRACT: The Author analyses the judicial system that has been put in placeby the stakeholders of the professional basketball competitions organized
and managed by a group of private companies under the brand Euroleague
Basketball. Focus is, in particular on the different procedures set out in theEuroleague Basketball Disciplinary Code which contains the set of rules
governing the disputes arising in connection with the provisions of theEuroleague Bylaws.

SUMMARY: 1. Introduction – 2. Euroleague Basketball – Structure and Organization– 2.1 Euroleague Commercial Assets S.A. – 2.2 Euroleague Properties S.A. andEuroleague Ventures S.A. – 2.3 Euroleague Entertainment & Services S.L.U. –2.4 Conditions for Participation in the Euroleague Basketball Competitions –3. The Euroleague Basketball Judicial System – 3.1 The Euroleague Basketball
Disciplinary Code – 3.2 The Euroleague Basketball Hearing Bodies – 3.3 General
Principles of the Code – 3.4 Types of Infringements and Applicable Procedure –3.4.1 Infringements of the Regulations Regarding the Management andAdministration of the Competition – 3.4.2 Infringements of the Rules Occurring
During the Course of a Game or the Euroleague Basketball Competitions –3.4.3 Infringements of the Financial Stability and Fair Play Regulations –3.4.4 Infringements Related to the Failure to Comply with the Terms of Awards ofthe EBDRC – 3.5 Sanctions and General Principles Applicable for the Settingof Sanctions – 4. Internal Appeal System – 5. Appeal to the Court of Arbitrationfor Sport – 6. Doping Infringements – 7. Other Disputes within the Euroleague
Basketball Not Governed by the Code – 7.1 Disputes in Connection with theContract Entered into by the Clubs To Participate in the Euroleague Basketball____________________

Swiss qualified attorney-at-law, partner at Kellerhals Carrard, Lugano (Switzerland),Member of the Appeals Panel of Euroleague Basketball.

*

816

Andrea Fioravanti

EUROLEAGUE BASKETBALL

Competitions – 7.2 Disputes Between Clubs in Connection with the Hiring andTransfer of a Player or Coach – 7.3 Disputes Relating to the EuroLeague
Framework Agreement (EFA) – 7.4 Disputes Arising in Connection with the
EuroLeague Standard Player Contract – 8. Conclusion

1.

INTRODUCTION

2.

EUROLEAGUE BASKETBALL – STRUCTURE AND ORGANIZATIONAs mentioned, Euroleague Basketball is only the brand under which the
EuroLeague and the EuroCup basketball club competitions are organized.
2.1

Euroleague Commercial Assets S.A.

Euroleague Commercial Assets S.A. (ECA) is the controlling companyof the group of companies which organizes and manages the Euroleague
Basketball Competitions.

TEASER

Euroleague Basketball is the brand under which a corporate group (Euroleague
Commercial Assets S.A., a limited liability company with seat in Luxemburg, andits controlled companies Euroleague Properties S.A. and Euroleague Entertainment& Services S.L.U.) organizes and manages two top-level pan-European
professional basketball competitions, namely the “EuroLeague” and “EuroCup”.
The EuroLeague and EuroCup (hereinafter also referred to jointly as
the “Euroleague Basketball Competitions”) are thus transnational club competitionsorganized and managed by a private corporation, whose shareholders are clubs
and domestic leagues and not, as is commonly the case for team sports within theEuropean sports world, by an international sporting federation, generally organized
as a non-profit association, whose members are national federations. Said
competitions do not, therefore, fall within the federative sphere and whenparticipating in competitions organized under the Euroleague Basketball brand,
the relevant actors (teams, athletes, coaches etc.) do not fall under the direct
jurisdiction of the respective national federations to which they belong.
Euroleague Basketball and its competitions represent an interesting andparticular case where a European club competition is, in some ways, inspired by
the American professional sports model.

817

The shareholders of ECA are the clubs possessing long-term licenses
and known as “Licensed Clubs” (controlling approx. 75% of the shares)1 andnine domestic leagues,2 together with their representative association Union ofEuropean Basketball Leagues or “ULEB” (controlling approx. 25% of the shares).
ECA is responsible for the overall supervision of all matters regarding
the EuroLeague and the EuroCup as well as for approval of the relevant bylaws.
The supreme sporting body of ECA is the General Assembly composedby said ECA shareholders and by the so called “Associated Clubs”, i.e. theclubs participating in the EuroLeague on an annual basis with, however, no voting
rights. The General Assembly also ensures the coordination of the clubs andhas the authority to take decisions and confer functions on the Shareholders
Executive Board.3
The General Assembly appoints the Shareholders Executive Board,which has the duty to submit proposals and recommendations to the General
Assembly, to monitor and control the observance of the resolutions taken by theGeneral Assembly, to take urgent measures when there is no time to convene ameeting of the General Assembly, and to exercise any further functions conferredon it by the General Assembly.4
ECA’s Shareholders Executive Board consists of 13 representatives of
the Licensed Clubs that participate in the EuroLeague, and the Chief Executive
Officer, who will act as chairman of the Shareholders Executive Board.
All members of the Shareholders Executive Board are elected by the General
Assembly for a three-year term of office.
2.2

Euroleague Properties S.A. and Euroleague Ventures S.A.

Euroleague Properties S.A. (EP) is the limited company, controlled by ECA,
that is responsible for managing and organizing the EuroLeague and the EuroCup
and for commercializing the assets of the Euroleague Basketball Competitions.5
EP has assigned its responsibilities to Euroleague Ventures SA (EV),a joint venture company incorporated by EP and the American company[…]____________________

Anadolu Efes, CSKA Moscow, FC Barcelona, Fenerbahce, Maccabi Tel Aviv, Olimpia
Milano, Olympiacos, Panathinaikos, Real Madrid, Saski Baskonia, and Zalgiris Kaunas.
2
ACB (Spain), Lega (Italy), ABA (with clubs from countries of former Yugoslavia),
LNB (France), BBL (Germany), HEBA (Greece) BSL (Israel), PLK (Poland) VTB (with clubs
from the Russian Federation and some adjacent countries).
3
EuroLeague Regulations, Art. 1.1.
4
Idem, Art. 1.1.2.
5Idem, Art. 1.2.
1

844

INTERNATIONAL SPORTS JUSTICEINTERNATIONAL SPORTS JUSTICE:
CONCLUDING REMARKS
by Massimo Coccia and Michele Colucci

TEASERInternational sports justice varies very much and evolves constantly as it emerges
from the comparative analysis of the international sports organizations’ rules andcase law. All of them defend the domestic justice principle according to which
disputes between their members should be dealt with and settled within theirown structures of decision-making and adjudicating bodies.
In view of enhancing their autonomy, international sports organizations
developed their own judicial bodies. Some of them seem to be more effective
than others but all share the same goal: to settle disputes quickly and fairly, toprovide the correct interpretation and implementation of their own sports
regulations, and to grant compliance with their ethical standards.
Interestingly, international sports organizations tend to continuously
amend their statutes and regulations to increase the efficiency and fairness of
their sports justice systems. This is certainly to be appreciated as, of course,
improvements are always welcome; however, with specific regard to procedural
rules, it is probably desirable to also have some stability and predictability.
Therefore, it is submitted that an effort should be made by sports legislators toamend their sports justice mechanisms only at intervals of no less of, say, four
years. For example, the CAS Code of Sports-related Arbitration has seen inrecent years the following sequence of dates of entry into force of amendments:
1 January 2020; 1 July 2020; 1 November 2022; 1 February 2023. Comparable
sequences of amendments can be found in the justice rules of several international
federations. This is not ideal for the users of international sports justice, especiallybecause often the amendments from one year to the other are de minimis andmight definitely be bundled together and adopted at longer intervals.
This said, in this conclusive chapter we highlight some general principles,
important similarities and key distinctions that have been addressed in more detailthroughout this book, by comparing them, to focus on common trends and gain
substantial insight into what the future holds for international sports justice.

MASSIMO COCCIA AND MICHELE COLUCCIThe legal, economic and social consequences of highly commercial andmediatic sport disputes can be dramatic for the parties involved. They can havea worldwide echo in the media and the public opinion may question the purported
values and the credibility of the sports system. Therefore, sports organizations
have every interest in developing judicial systems’ fairness, efficiency and soundrapidity while fully abiding by the universally recognised, fundamental principlesof law and procedure.
In this perspective, disputes must be settled fairly and quickly by taking
into account the so-called specificity of sport, i.e. its specific characteristics linked
to the competitions, which require the presence of sports judges and arbitratorsthat have the professional qualifications and capacity to take quick and reasoned
decisions on technical matters but also on the huge variety of issues at stake(employment, commercial, eligibility, disciplinary, etc.).
Because of the sport’s specificity, the professional background and legal
expertise of judges and arbitrators of course is of paramount importance.
More and more, sports organizations require that sports judges have aprofessional legal background. Nevertheless, in order to be able to deal withspecific issues, such as doping, or pure technical matters related to the peculiarities
of any given sport, some judicial bodies are composed of people having a mixof backgrounds (not only legal but also medical or scientific) and can offer
adequate guarantees to their member as foreseen for instance by the FIA or bySport Resolutions.
In this connection, it is submitted that any and all sports justice institutionsof whatever status and tradition – from the CAS to every single justice body ofany sports organization – should organize and implement, on (at the very least) abiennial basis, education and training programs (even on-line) for the individuals
sitting in those justice bodies. Constant education and training on procedural andsubstantive legal issues are necessary to ensure the proper respect of due process
principles and the quality of the decisions taken. Such education and training
programs should address not only issues of sports law stricto sensu but also
those sectors of the law that are most likely to have a bearing on sports matters,such as – for example – antitrust law and human rights law, with the related
jurisprudence of national and international courts.
In order to guarantee a fair process in every sports organization,
independent and impartial tribunals that are fully knowledgeable of all aspects of
the law are essential. Indeed, sports law horizontally interacts with many otherareas of the law.
Equally important is the role of the General Secretariats or Offices of
the international sports organizations. They must have expertise and skills to ease

CONCLUDING REMARKS

845

VIA GIOVANNI PASCOLI 54
84014 NOCERA INFERIORE SALERNO ITALY
CF/P.IVA 05283020658
www.sportslawandpolicycentre.com – info@sportslawandpolicycentre.com
Bank details: IBAN IT47Y0103076480000063220265 - BIC/SWIFT PASCITMMSAR

ORDER FORM
INTERNATIONAL SPORTS LAW AND POLICY BULLETIN, ISSUE 1-2024

INTERNATIONAL SPORTS JUSTICETEASERa smooth start of the proceedings and, above all, ensure the successfulcommunication management between judges and parties along the entire durationof the proceedings.
As a matter of fact, not all international sports organizations have thesame weight: some are more important than others in terms of registered(professional and amateur) athletes; some are older than others and rely on arobust legal tradition that allowed them to design and develop a functional,
complex justice system, upgraded along the years.
Whatever the history of each of the sports organizations, their dispute
resolution mechanisms need to comply with the basic principles of due process:the interested parties must be given notice of the opening of a procedure, theyalso should be granted the right to access the file and to be heard, and theopportunity to adequately present their case as well as all supporting evidence.
Of course, sports proceedings should also be accessible to every
stakeholder, whatever their level of income, meaning that those proceedings should
be cost-efficient, because not all athletes, coaches or clubs can afford thesometimes very high costs of an international sports justice procedure. In thisregard, the introduction of lists of pro-bono counsels by CAS and recently bysome major sports organizations (such as FIFA and UEFA) is surely helfpul.
A fair sport dispute resolution mechanism should be fast and efficient.
Therefore, procedures should be streamlined based on the nature and value ofeach dispute, allowing the relevant judges within the various sports organizations
to pass decisions in a span of a few weeks.
Following this approach, FIFA, FIBA and FIPV reformed theirrespective justice systems to better match the disputes’ content with the competentjudges’ professional skills, so they can review the matters easily and deliver theirdecisions very quickly.
Some federations, such as FIFA, prefer to have written procedures
instead of oral hearings, given that the parties to a dispute can still lodge anappeal before the CAS where they can be heard, call for witnesses, andcross-examine the other side’s witnesses.
FIFA has established the Football Tribunal, which is composed of three
specific chambers: the Dispute Resolution Chamber, the Players’ Status Chamber
and the Agents Chamber. Each chamber has jurisdiction on a certain number ofmatters. In principle, at least for the less complex cases, there is only one roundof submissions and decisions can be taken by single judges, and procedures arecosts-free if at least one of the parties is a natural person (e.g. a player or coach)
To make the system even more effective, FIFA has also put in place
other judicial bodies that can impose a wide range of sanctions in case of breachof its rules.
[…]

SPORTS LAW AND POLICY CENTRE

Massimo Coccia – Michele Colucci (eds.)
ISBN 978-88-943373-4-1

To order please send an email to info@sportslawandpolicycentre.com
PAPER VERSION EUR150.00
Italy (VAT included), Other countries (plus VAT 4%, if applicable)
Plus shipment costs:
Italy EUR10.00
Europe EUR30.00
Other countries EUR50.00