Skip to main content

CAS 2015/A/4151, Panathinaikos FC v. Union des Associations Européennes de Football (UEFA) & Olympiakos FC, Award of 26 November 2015 (Operative Part of 24 August 2015)

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Yearbook of International Sports Arbitration 2016

Part of the book series: Yearbook of International Sports Arbitration ((YISA))

  • 564 Accesses

Abstract

In the context of the two-stage procedure undertaken by UEFA in respect of match-fixing, UEFA is entitled to take an administrative measure—non-admission to a competition for one season—followed by a subsequent disciplinary procedure. Nevertheless, despite the administrative measure not being of a purely sanctioning nature, a certain standard of proof must be met. In case the competent body, on the basis of all the factual circumstances and information available, is not comfortably satisfied of a direct or indirect involvement of the club in match-fixing activities, the club shall be declared eligible and be admitted to the competition. Another competitor may appeal the decision admitting a club into a competition, only if it can demonstrate that it is directly or legally affected by the decision at stake. Thus, not all competitors in a competition are automatically deemed affected. In the event that the competition is already underway, the required evidence of a sufficient interest is even stricter as any replacement measure is considered as disruptive and would fall under the competence of the Emergency Panel to deal with in the scope of its margin of discretion and bearing in mind a smooth running and integrity of the competition.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    CAS 2015/A/4151, Panathinaikos FC v. Union des Associations Européennes de Football (UEFA) & Olympiakos FC, Award of 26 November 2015, para 8.

  2. 2.

    Ibid., para 9.

  3. 3.

    Ibid., para 18.

  4. 4.

    Ibid., paras 27–28.

  5. 5.

    CAS 2015/A/4151, Panathinaikos FC v. Union des Associations Européennes de Football (UEFA) & Olympiakos FC, Award of 26 November 2015, paras 4–7.

  6. 6.

    Graham Wood, Owner of Greek Champions Banned over Corruption Probe, 18 June 2015. http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-soccer-greece-olympiakos-idUKKBN0OY1L320150618. Accessed 22 March 2017.

  7. 7.

    CAS 2015/A/4151, Panathinaikos FC v. Union des Associations Européennes de Football (UEFA) & Olympiakos FC, Award of 26 November 2015, para 16.

  8. 8.

    Isabelle Westbury, 85 Defendants Charged in Greek Football Match-Fixing Case, 31 July 2015. http://www.sportsintegrityinitiative.com/85-defendants-charged-in-greek-football-match-fixing-case/. Accessed 22 March 2017.

  9. 9.

    CAS 2015/A/4151, Panathinaikos FC v. Union des Associations Européennes de Football (UEFA) & Olympiakos FC, Award of 26 November 2015, para 23.

  10. 10.

    Article 4.07 UCLR reads as follows: “[i]f there is any doubt as to whether a club fulfils other admission criteria than those defined in paras 4.01(c) and 4.01(d), the UEFA General Secretary refers the case to the UEFA Control, Ethics and Disciplinary Body, which decides without delay upon the admission in accordance with the UEFA Disciplinary Regulations. UEFA may carry out investigations at any time (even after the end of the competition) to ensure that these other criteria are or have been met until the end of the competition; if such an investigation reveals that one of these other criteria is or was no longer met in the course of the competition, the club concerned is liable to disciplinary measures in accordance with the UEFA Disciplinary Regulations”.

  11. 11.

    CAS 2015/A/4151, Panathinaikos FC v. Union des Associations Européennes de Football (UEFA) & Olympiakos FC, Award of 26 November 2015, para 10.

  12. 12.

    Ibid., para 11.

  13. 13.

    Article 50(3) UEFA Statutes; Article 23(3) UEFA Disciplinary Regulations (2014 edition).

  14. 14.

    CAS 2015/A/4151, Panathinaikos FC v. Union des Associations Européennes de Football (UEFA) & Olympiakos FC, Award of 26 November 2015, para 13.

  15. 15.

    Olympiakos was of the opinion that the ongoing proceedings in Greece would lead to an acquittal of Mr. Marinakis.

  16. 16.

    CAS 2015/A/4151, Panathinaikos FC v. Union des Associations Européennes de Football (UEFA) & Olympiakos FC, Award of 26 November 2015, para 15.

  17. 17.

    Ibid., para 17.

  18. 18.

    Ibid., para 19.

  19. 19.

    Ibid., para 20.

  20. 20.

    Article 34(6) UEFA Disciplinary Regulations (2014 edition).

  21. 21.

    CAS 2015/A/4151, Panathinaikos FC v. Union des Associations Européennes de Football (UEFA) & Olympiakos FC, Award of 26 November 2015, para 27.

  22. 22.

    Ibid., para 29.

  23. 23.

    Article 4.01(a) UCLR.

  24. 24.

    Article 4.01(g) UCLR.

  25. 25.

    In particular, Article 48(g) UDR (2014 edition) stipulates the proceedings are opened where a complaint has been filed.

  26. 26.

    Article 4.01(f) UCLR reads as follows: “(…) proceedings before the CAS concerning admission to, participation in or exclusion from the competition will be held in an expedited manner in accordance with the CAS Code of Sports-related Arbitration and with the directions issued by the CAS, including for provisional or super-provisional measures, to the explicit exclusion of any State court”.

  27. 27.

    CAS 2015/A/4151, Panathinaikos FC v. Union des Associations Européennes de Football (UEFA) & Olympiakos FC, Award of 26 November 2015, para 38.

  28. 28.

    Ibid., para 39. The Appellant requested, alternatively, to defer the decision on disciplinary sanction.

  29. 29.

    Ibid., para 43.

  30. 30.

    Ibid., paras 54–56.

  31. 31.

    CAS 2008/A/1583 & 1584, Sport Lisboa e Benfica Futebol SAD & Victoria Sport Clube v. UEFA & FC Porto Futebol SAD, Award of 15 September 2008. Here the Panel considered that “Although according to Swiss law only the members of an association, who voted against a resolution, have the right to challenge the association’s resolution pursuant to Article 75 Swiss Civil Code (ZGB), if the challenge concerns a decision by an organ of the association, which the members cannot influence not only the addressee of the measure has the right to appeal but so do third parties, who are directly affected by the resolution.” Paragraph 9.5.5.1. Further, the Panel concluded that “granting third parties the right to appeal if they are directly affected by the measure taken by the association”. Paragraph 9.5.5.2.

  32. 32.

    CAS 2015/A/4151, Panathinaikos FC v. Union des Associations Européennes de Football (UEFA) & Olympiakos FC, Award of 26 November 2015, para 59.

  33. 33.

    Ibid., para 61.

  34. 34.

    CAS 2013/A/3297, Public Joint-Stock Company “Football Club Metalist” v. UEFA & PAOK FC, Award of 29 November 2013.

  35. 35.

    CAS 2013/A/3258, Besiktas Jimnastik Kulübü v. UEFA, Award of 23 January 2014.

  36. 36.

    CAS 2015/A/4151, Panathinaikos FC v. Union des Associations Européennes de Football (UEFA) & Olympiakos FC, Award of 26 November 2015, para 62.

  37. 37.

    Ibid., para 63.

  38. 38.

    Ibid., paras 66–67.

  39. 39.

    Ibid., para 68 et seq.

  40. 40.

    Ibid., para 85.

  41. 41.

    Ibid., para 86.

  42. 42.

    Ibid., para 87.

  43. 43.

    Article 4.06 UCLR and Article 4.07 UCLR expressly mention that “UEFA may carry out investigations at any time (even after the end of the competition) (…)”.

  44. 44.

    CAS 2015/A/4151, Panathinaikos FC v. Union des Associations Européennes de Football (UEFA) & Olympiakos FC, Award of 26 November 2015, paras 88–89.

  45. 45.

    Ibid., para 90.

  46. 46.

    Ibid., para 91.

  47. 47.

    CAS 2013/A/3297, Public Joint-Stock Company “Football Club Metalist” v. UEFA & PAOK FC, Award of 29 November 2013; CAS 2013/A/3258, Besiktas Jimnastik Kulübü v. UEFA, Award of 23 January 2014.

  48. 48.

    CAS 2008/A/1583 & 1584, Sport Lisboa e Benfica Futebol SAD &Victoria Sport Clube versus UEFA & FC Porto Futebol SAD, Award of 15 September 2008; CAS 2013/A/3297, Public Joint-Stock Company “Football Club Metalist” v. UEFA & PAOK FC, Award of 29 November 2013.

  49. 49.

    CAS 2015/A/4151, Panathinaikos FC v. Union des Associations Européennes de Football (UEFA) & Olympiakos FC, Award of 26 November 2015, para 93.

  50. 50.

    Ibid., paras 94–95.

  51. 51.

    Ibid., para 99 et seq.

  52. 52.

    Ibid., para 106.

  53. 53.

    Ibid., para 110.

  54. 54.

    Ibid., para 111.

  55. 55.

    CAS 2008/A/1583 & 1584, Sport Lisboa e Benfica Futebol SAD &Victoria Sport Clube versus UEFA & FC Porto Futebol SAD, Award of 15 September 2008.

  56. 56.

    CAS 2015/A/4151, Panathinaikos FC v. Union des Associations Européennes de Football (UEFA) & Olympiakos FC, Award of 26 November 2015, para 113.

  57. 57.

    UEFA adds that Panathinaikos acted in bad faith, as it filed a complaint in a separate procedure and at the same time sought to appeal the Appealed Decision.

  58. 58.

    Whereas the question of a possible replacement in the competition of the Respondent by the Appellant concerns the merits of the appeal. CAS 2015/A/4151, Panathinaikos FC v. Union des Associations Européennes de Football (UEFA) & Olympiakos FC, Award of 26 November 2015, para 123.

  59. 59.

    Ibid., para 126.

  60. 60.

    Article 48 UDR.

  61. 61.

    CAS 2015/A/4151, Panathinaikos FC v. UEFA & Olympiakos FC, Award of 26 November 2015, para 128.

  62. 62.

    Ibid., paras 129–130.

  63. 63.

    Ibid., para 130.

  64. 64.

    Ibid., para 136.

  65. 65.

    Ibid., para 134.

  66. 66.

    Ibid., paras 137–138.

  67. 67.

    Ibid., para 139.

  68. 68.

    Ibid., para 140.

  69. 69.

    Ibid., para 141. The Panel underlined that in the cases involving Sivasspor (CAS/2014/A/3625, Sivasspor Kulüb v. Union of European Football Association (UEFA), Award of 3 November 2014) and Eskisehispor (CAS 2014/A/3628, Eskisehirspor Kulübü v. Union of European Football Association (UEFA), Award of 2 September 2014), the competition had not yet started. Therefore, the equivalent provision applicable to the UEFA Europa League to Article 4.08 of the UCLR could still apply.

  70. 70.

    CAS 2013/A/3322, Bursaspor Kulübü Dernegi v. UEFA, Award of 28 August 2013; CAS 2013/A/3297, Public Joint-Stock Company “Football Club Metalist” v. UEFA & PAOK FC, Award of 29 November 2013, in which the Emergency Panel decided to replace Metalist by the club it had eliminated in the qualifying round, PAOK FC; CAS 2013/A/3258, Besiktas Jimnastik Kulübü v. UEFA, Award of 23 January 2014.

  71. 71.

    CAS 2015/A/4151, Panathinaikos FC v. UEFA & Olympiakos FC, Award of 26 November 2015, para 142.

  72. 72.

    Ibid., para 146.

  73. 73.

    Ibid., para 147.

  74. 74.

    Ibid., paras 149–150.

  75. 75.

    Article 23(3) UDR.

  76. 76.

    Article 4.03 UCLR; cf. for this question a more recent award: CAS 2016/A/4650, Klubi Sportiv Skenderbeu v. UEFA, Award of 21 November 2016, para 47. The Panel recalls that there is no issue to impose an initial administrative measure, which bears a punitive element, and in a second step open disciplinary proceedings.

  77. 77.

    Inter alia CAS 2014/A/3628, Eskisehirspor Kulübü v. Union of European Football Association (UEFA), Award of 2 September 2014, para 100.

  78. 78.

    Article 12 UDR.

  79. 79.

    CAS 2016/A/4650, Klubi Sportiv Skenderbeu v. UEFA, Award of 21 November 2016, para 50. See also Emilio Garcia, UEFA’s Betting Fraud Detection System: How Does the CAS Regard this Monitoring Tool? 25 January 2017. http://www.asser.nl/SportsLaw/Blog/post/uefa-s-betting-fraud-detection-system-how-does-the-cas-regard-this-monitoring-tool-by-emilio-garcia. Accessed 22 March 2017.

  80. 80.

    CAS 2008/A/1583 & 1584, Sport Lisboa e Benfica Futebol SAD & Victoria Sport Clube v. UEFA & FC Porto Futebol SAD, Award of 15 September 2008.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marc Cavaliero .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 T.M.C. Asser Press and the authors

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Cavaliero, M. (2017). CAS 2015/A/4151, Panathinaikos FC v. Union des Associations Européennes de Football (UEFA) & Olympiakos FC, Award of 26 November 2015 (Operative Part of 24 August 2015). In: Duval, A., Rigozzi, A. (eds) Yearbook of International Sports Arbitration 2016. Yearbook of International Sports Arbitration. T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague. https://doi.org/10.1007/15757_2017_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/15757_2017_10

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-6265-236-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-6265-237-8

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics