4351 Vsl Pakruojo FK, Darius Jankauskas, Arnas Mikaitis, Sigitas Olberkis, Valdas Pocevicius, Alfredas Skroblas, Donatas Strockis, Diogo Gouveia Miranda, C.H
Tribunal Arbitral du Sport Court of Arbitration for Sport Arbitration CAS 2015/A/4351 Vsl Pakruojo FK, Darius Jankauskas, Arnas Mikaitis, Sigitas Olberkis, Valdas Pocevicius, Alfredas Skroblas, Donatas Strockis, Diogo Gouveia Miranda, C.H. Alexandru and Taras Michailiuk v. Lithuanian Football Federation (LFF), award of 13 July 2016 Panel: Prof. Luigi Fumagalli (Italy), President; Mr Sofoklis Pilavios (Greece); Mr José Juan Pintó (Spain) Football Match fixing CAS jurisdiction Applicable regulation to a match fixing infringement Burden of proof regarding actual and presumed commission of match fixing Establishment of a finding of presumed commission of match fixing De novo hearing Proportionality of the sanctions 1. As made clear by the applicable disciplinary regulations of the federation, jurisdiction is granted to CAS only with respect to the decisions rendered by the federation’s appeal committee. In addition, the CAS jurisprudence, based on the wording of Article R47 of the Code, made it clear that the exhaustion of internal remedies is one of conditions for the CAS jurisdiction to exist. CAS would not have jurisdiction to hear an appeal (therefore to be deemed inadmissible) brought against the disciplinary body decision alone. However, where the disciplinary body decision is challenged together with the appeal committee decision, which dealt with the same issues, the CAS has jurisdiction to hear the dispute concerning the disciplinary infringements for which the appellants were sanctioned, as defined by the appealed decisions. 2. The
[Show full text]