Bulletin 2012 2 FINAL.Indd
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Bulletin TAS CAS Bulletin 2 / 2012 Table des matières / Table of contents Message du Président du CIAS / Message of the ICAS President Message of the ICAS President ................................................................................................................................................ 1 Articles et commentaires / Articles and commentaries When is a “Swiss ” “award ” appealable ? ................................................................................................................................... 2 Dr. Charles Poncet La preuve du dopage dans les cas de présence d’une substance interdite ....................................................................... 15 Me Estelle de La Rochefoucauld, Conseiller auprès du TAS Jurisprudence majeure / Leading cases Arbitration CAS 2011/A/2360 & CAS 2011/A/2392 .........................................................................................................26 English Chess Federation & Georgian Chess Federation v. Fédération Internationale des Echecs (FIDE) 3 July 2012 Arbitration CAS 2011/A/2425 ................................................................................................................................................ 33 Ahongalu Fusimalohi v. Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) 8 March 2012 Arbitration CAS 2011/A/2563 ...............................................................................................................................................50 CD Nacional v. FK Sutjeska 30 March 2012 Arbitrage TAS 2011/A/2585 .................................................................................................................................................... 55 Agence Mondiale Antidopage (AMA) c. Ramiro Marino & Union Ciclista Republica Argentina (UCRA) 21 mai 2012 Arbitration CAS 2011/A/2615 .................................................................................................................................................60 Thibaut Fauconnet v. International Skating Union (ISU) & Arbitration CAS 2011/A/2618 International Skating Union (ISU) v. Thibaut Fauconnet 19 April 2012 Arbitrage TAS 2011/A/2616 ....................................................................................................................................................67 Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) c. Oscar Sevilla Rivera & Real Federación Española de Ciclismo (RFEC) 15 mai 2012 Arbitration CAS 2011/A/2621 ................................................................................................................................................77 David Savic v. Professional Tennis Integrity Offi cers (PTIOs) 5 September 2012 Arbitration CAS 2011/A/2646 ................................................................................................................................................85 Club Rangers de Talca v. Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) 30 April 2012 Arbitration CAS 2011/A/2658 ................................................................................................................................................93 British Olympic Association (BOA) v. World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) 30 April 2012 Arbitration CAS 2011/A/2671 .............................................................................................................................................103 Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) v. Alex Rasmussen & The National Olympic Committee and Sports Confederation of Denmark (Dansk Idraetsforbund) 4 July 2012 Arbitration CAS 2011/A/2677 ...............................................................................................................................................114 Dmitry Lapikov v. International Weightlifting Federation (IWF) 10 July 2012 Arbitration CAS 2011/A/2678 .............................................................................................................................................120 International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) v. Real Federación Española de Atletismo (RFEA) & Francisco Fernández Peláez 17 April 2012 Arbitration CAS 2012/A/2689 ............................................................................................................................................. 131 S.C. Sporting Club S.A. Vaslui v Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) 13 April 2012 Jugements du Tribunal Fédéral / Judgments of the Federal Tribunal 4A_558/2011, Judgment of 27 March 2012, First Civil Law Court ................................................................................135 4A_246/2011, Judgment of 7 November 2011, First Civil Law Court .......................................................................... 142 4A_627/2011, Judgment of 8 March 2012, First Civil Law Court .................................................................................148 4A_488/2011, Arrêt du 18 juin 2012, Ire Cour de droit civil .......................................................................................... 155 4A_636/2011, Judgment of 18 June 2012, First Civil Law Court ...................................................................................164 4A_134/2012, Arrêt du 16 juillet 2012, Ire Cour de droit civil ....................................................................................... 168 Informations diverses / Miscellaneous Publications récentes relatives au TAS / Recent publications related to CAS ...............................................................173 Message of the ICAS President The last months have been particularly busy with a Last summer, the CAS ad hoc Division (CAS AHD) signifi cant number of high profi le cases handled selected by the ICAS for the Olympic Games in Lon- by the Court of Arbitration for Sport. Among the don composed of twelve arbitrators rendered eleven ‘leading cases’ selected for the Bulletin are several (11) awards. Since 1996 and the fi rst CAS ad hoc Di- cases related to doping. A few “doping ” cases are vision, only the Sydney Games generated more deci- of interest with respect to the recent developments sions in one edition of the Games (15). Most of the regarding the conditions to benefi t from a reduced cases heard were related to the selection and qualifi ca- sanction for the use of specifi ed substances. The case tion of athletes. During a major international sporting UCI v. Rasmussen & DIF deals with the whereabouts event such as the Olympic Games, expediency is ob- failure issue whereas the conditions to benefi t from viously a key element of the rules applicable. Indeed, a reduction of the sanction based on Substantial according to Art. 18 of the Arbitration Rules for the Assistance are clearly defi ned in the case IAAF v. Olympic Games, the CAS AHD shall resolve any dis- RFEA & Francisco Fernandez. The CAS has also pute arising on the occasion of or in connection with confi rmed the notable “USOC award ” in the British the Olympic Games within 24 hours of the lodging Olympic Association v. WADA case by considering of the application. The “London” decisions will be that an NOC’s provision providing that an athlete gathered in a coming digest entitled “CAS Awards found guilty of a doping offence is ineligible to Olympic Games 2012 ”. compete in the Olympic Games is an “extra ” or “double ” doping sanction not in compliance with the Eight (8) new arbitrators have been appointed in or- World Anti-Doping Code. Turning to football, the case der to strengthen the current group of CAS members CD Nacional v. FK Sutjeska specifi cally considers the in view of the heavy workload placed on them and meaning of Article 15 of the FIFA Rules Governing the increasing number of arbitrations (297 so far in the Procedures of the Players’ Status Committee 2012). To date, fi ve (5) mediators have been appoint- and the Dispute Resolution Chamber. The case Club ed this year which make a total number of fi fty seven Rangers de Talca v. FIFA is of interest with respect to (57) mediators. the bankruptcy of a club while the decision rendered in Fusimalohi v. FIFA contemplates the consequences I wish you a pleasant reading of this new edition of of the infringement of the Code of Ethics by a FIFA the CAS Bulletin. offi cial and addresses the issue of illegal evidence in arbitration. On another sporting fi eld, the case Savic v. PTIO looks at the issue of corruption/match fi xing in tennis and to the standard of proof requested while the chess case English Chess Federation & Georgian Chess Federation v. Fédération Internationale des John Coates Echecs (FIDE) deals interestingly with the scope of Article R49 of the CAS Code. The article of Dr. Charles Poncet entitled “When is a “Swiss” “award” appealable ? ” included in this issue is of great practical importance. In concrete terms, it aims at helping foreign readers to ascertain which “awards ” issued by an international arbitral tribunal sitting in Switzerland should be appealed, as opposed to other decisions. Message du Président du CIAS / Message from the ICAS Président - 1 When is a “Swiss” “award” appealable ?* Dr. Charles Poncet* I. The appeal ...............................................................................................................................................................................4 II. Grounds for appeal ..............................................................................................................................................................4 III. Appealable decisions: a deceptively “simple ” system ......................................................................................................4