Abstract
Does a party which is not the addressee of a decision by an association have standing to appeal such decision? This question has been discussed intensely in various recent decisions by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). On the one hand, there is certainly a legitimate interest in not granting a right to appeal to every party remotely affected by a decision. On the other hand, there are many instances in the sports world in which third parties are affected by decisions addressed to other parties. Does an athlete finishing tenth in an Olympic event have standing to appeal a decision determining that the gold medallist is not disqualified? How about the athlete who would have won the bronze medal if the gold medallist had been disqualified? Should the football player Giorgio Chiellini have standing to appeal a decision finding that Luis Suárez should not be punished for biting him during a match at the FIFA World Cup 2014? Although this question may be of great importance, neither the Code of Sports-related Arbitration (“CAS Code”) nor the association rules give clear guidance as to the circumstances under which a third party has standing to appeal. This article provides an overview of the legal concept of standing to appeal of third parties against decisions not addressed to them (Sect. 1), the most relevant CAS jurisprudence dealing with this topic (Sect. 2) and a comparison with other fields of law addressing similar procedural scenarios (Sect. 3). The authors’ aim is to identify objective guidelines for answering the question of standing to appeal in order to increase the predictability of CAS decisions dealing with this question.
The authors are Attorneys at Law at the Munich-based law firm Martens Lawyers, which, inter alia, specialises in providing legal services to the sports industry (www.martens-lawyers.com). In CAS 2015/A/4151, Panathinaikos FC v. UEFA & Olympiakos FC (analysed below), the author Christian Keidel represented the Appellant.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Rigozzi and Hasler 2013, Article R47 CAS Code, para 22.
- 2.
SFT 126 III 59, para 1a.
- 3.
CAS 2007/A/1392, Federación Panameña de Judo (FPJ) & Federación Venezolana de Judo (FVJ) v. International Judo Federation (IJF), Award of 9 September 2008, para 65.
- 4.
CAS/A/1583&1584, Benfica v. UEFA & FC Porto, Vitória Guimarães v. UEFA & FC Porto, Award of 15 July 2008, para 21.
- 5.
CAS 2013/A/3417, FC Metz v. NK Nafta Lendava, Award of 13 August 2014, paras 57 et seq.; CAS 2015/A/4151, Panathinaikos FC v. UEFA & Olympiakos FC, Award of 26 November 2015, paras 133 et seq.; CAS 2015/A/3874, Albania v UEFA & Serbia, Award of 10 July 2015, paras 164 et seq.; CAS 2015/A/4162, Liga Deportiva Alajuelense v. Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA), Award of 3 February 2016, paras 72 et seq.
- 6.
CAS 2013/A/3417, FC Metz v. NK Nafta Lendava, Award of 13 August 2014, paras 57 et seq.
- 7.
Mavromati and Reeb 2015, Article R41 CAS Code, para 80, pp. 291 et seq.
- 8.
- 9.
Niggli 2016, Article 75 ZGB, para 4.
- 10.
Riemer 1990, Article 75, para 19; see also CAS/A/1583&1584, Benfica v. UEFA & FC Porto, Vitória Guimarães v. UEFA & FC Porto, Award of 15 July 2008, para 29.
- 11.
This finding is indicated by the considerations of SFT 108 II 15, para 4.
- 12.
Riemer 1990, Article 75, para 19.
- 13.
CAS 2002/O/373, COC & Beckie Scott v. IOC, Award of 18 December 2003, pp. 1 et seq.
- 14.
Ibid., para 23.
- 15.
Ibid., para 23.
- 16.
Ibid., para 24.
- 17.
CAS/A/1583&1584, Benfica v. UEFA & FC Porto, Vitória Guimarães v. UEFA & FC Porto, Award of 15 July 2008, pp. 2 et seq.
- 18.
Ibid., para 24.
- 19.
Ibid., para 30.
- 20.
Ibid., para 31.
- 21.
Ibid., paras 32 et seq.
- 22.
CAS 2015/A/4151, Panathinaikos FC v. UEFA & Olympiakos FC Award of 26 November 2015, paras 4 et seq.
- 23.
Ibid., para 56.
- 24.
Ibid., para 147.
- 25.
Ibid., para 146.
- 26.
CAS 2015/A/3874, Football Association of Albania v. UEFA & Football Association of Serbia, Award of 10 July 2015, paras 181 et seq.
- 27.
CAS/A/1583&1584, Benfica v. UEFA & FC Porto, Vitória Guimarães v. UEFA & FC Porto, Award of 15 July 2008, para 31.
- 28.
SFT 135 II 172, para 2.1.
- 29.
Ibid.
- 30.
German Federal Court of Administration (Bundesverwaltungsgericht), Award of 25 February 1977, IV C 22/75, NJW 1978, 62 et seq.; Austrian High Court of Administration (Verwaltungsgerichtshof), 2002/03/0186.
- 31.
German Federal Court of Administration (Bundesverwaltungsgericht), Order of 24 June 2011, 8 B 31/11, juris. Rn. 5.
- 32.
Ibid.
- 33.
Cf. Purpose, Scope and Organization of the World Anti-Doping Program and the Code at p. 11 of the WADA Code 2015.
- 34.
Article 10.2. WADA Code concerns the Ineligibility for Presence, Use or Attempted Use or Possession of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method.
- 35.
CAS OG 16/13, Anastasia Karabelshikova & Ivan Podshivalov v. FISA & IOC, Award of 4 August 2016, para 85.
- 36.
See the discussion of CAS 2002/O/373 under Sect. 2.1.
- 37.
SFT 139 IV 78, para 3.3.3.
- 38.
See SFT 141 IV 231, para 2.5 with reference to SFT 139 IV 78 and SFT 139 IV 84.
- 39.
- 40.
See CAS 2005/C/976 & 986, Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) & World Antidoping Agency (WADA), Award of 21 April 2006, para 127.
- 41.
CAS 2007/A/1392, Federación Panameña de Judo (FPJ) & Federación Venezolana de Judo (FVJ) v. International Judo Federation (IJF), Award of 9 September 2008, para 8.
References
Mavromati D, Reeb M (2015) The Code of Arbitration for Sport. Commentary, Cases and Materials. Kluwer Law International, Alphen aan den Rijn
Nater H, Tuchschmid M (2006) TAS: Ist Art. 75 ZGB im Appellationsverfahren zu beachten? SpuRt 2006: 139–144
Niggli M (2016) Art. 75 ZGB. In: Breitschmid P, Jungo A (eds) Handkommentar zum Schweizer Privatrecht. Schulthess, Zurich, pp. 265–269
Riemer H (1990) Berner Kommentar. Kommentar zum schweizerischen Privatrecht, Band I, 3. Abteilung, 2. Teilband. Stämpfli & Cie AG, Bern
Rigozzi A, Hasler E (2013) Sports Arbitration under the CAS Rules. Part II, Chapter 5. Text of the CAS Procedural Rules. In: Arroyo M (ed) Arbitration in Switzerland. The Practitioner’s Guide. Kluwer Law International, Alphen aan den Rijn, pp. 895–1083
Scherrer U (2008) Vereinsrechtliche Anfechtungsklage und Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit im Sport. CausaSport 2008: 58–65
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 T.M.C. Asser press and the authors
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Keidel, C., Fischer, P. (2017). Standing to Appeal of Third Parties in Front of CAS. 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_17
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/15757_2017_17
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)