Issues of Using Evidence and the Process of Proof in the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS)

  • Ilia A. Vasilyev Saint Petersburg State University
  • Natalia N. Kislyakova KIAP Attorneys at Law
  • Sergey A. Yurlov National Association of Russian Sports Lawyers
Keywords: sports arbitration, CAS, evidences, presumption of innocence, standards of proof, disciplinary liability, sports liability

Abstract

Dispute resolution in the Court of Arbitration for Sport (hereinafter: “CAS”) has certain specificity that makes CAS different not only from other institutions for sports disputes resolution but also from commercial and investment arbitration. The following research paper brings light to such specific issues related to CAS as to presumption of innocence in the area of sport, using different standards of proof (“comfortable satisfaction”, “beyond reasonable doubts” and “balance of probabilities”), issue of using evidence obtained in an illegal way in match-fixing disputes. The authors also referred to the issues of certain arts of evidence that would be unusual for commercial arbitration, but which are commonly used in CAS, issues of not allowing new evidence in appeal proceedings, the issue of necessity to form lists of witnesses and experts at the earliest stages of the proceedings, issue of disclosure of evidence in CAS and possibility to use evidence obtained out of the given time limits. As for the methodology that the authors used, these widely spread in legal research methods include analysis of international legal sources, analysis norms of sports bodies, a decision of disciplinary bodies and CAS awards, making conclusions regarding certain issues and problems, defining the specificity of evidence and methods of proving in CAS. The conclusions proposed by the authors made help to form new approaches for implementation of a presumption of innocence principle in the area of sport and show an attitude of sports organizations and CAS towards certain remedies.

Author Biographies

Ilia A. Vasilyev, Saint Petersburg State University

Associate Professor, Department of History and Theory of Law, Saint Petersburg State University, Candidate of Juridical Sciences. Address: 7-9 Universitetskaya Embankment, Saint Petersburg 199034, Russian Federation. E-mail: i.vasilev@spbu.ru

Natalia N. Kislyakova, KIAP Attorneys at Law

Lawyer, KIAP Attorneys at Law, Candidate of Juridical Sciences. Address: 68/70 Butyrskiy Val Str., Moscow 127055, Russian Federation. E-mail: nk@kiaplaw.ru

Sergey A. Yurlov, National Association of Russian Sports Lawyers

Lawyer, National Association of Russian Sports Lawyers, Candidate of Juridical Sciences. Address: 22 Rublevskoye Highway, Moscow 121615, Russian Federation. E-mail: sergej.iurlov@yandex.ru

References

Arroyo M (ed.) (2013) Arbitration in Switzerland: The Practitioner's Guide. Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer Law International, 2013. 1489 p.

Beloff M., Kerr T., Demetriou M. (1999) Sports Law. Portland: Hart, 1999. 309 p.

Belyaev S.A. (2005) Issues of international sports arbitration. Treteyskiy sud, no 5, pp. 94-95 (in Russian)

Danilevich A.S., Ol'khovka F.K. (2016) Exceptional circumstances in solving disputes in Sports Arbitration. Treteyskiy sud, no 2/3, pp. 163-170 (in Russian)

De La Rochefoucauld E. (2015) Taking of Evidence before the CAS. CAS Bulletin 2015, no 1. Available at: http://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Bulletin_2015_1_internet3.pdf (accessed: 12.10. 2018).

Fraport A. (2010) Frankfurt Airport Services Worldwide v. The Republic of the Philippines, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/25. 2010. Available at: https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/ita0341.pdf (accessed: 12.10.2018)

Kaufmann-Kohler G. (2007) Arbitral Precedent: Dream, Necessity or Excuse? Arbitration International, no 3, pp. 365-366.

Martens D. (2006) CAS Landmark Decisions. The Court of Arbitration for Sport, Blackshaw M. (ed.). The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 577 p.

Martens D. (2011) The Role of the Arbitrator in CAS Proceedings. Reflections on How to Prepare for and Conduct a Hearing of a CAS Case. Munich: Martens Rechtsanwalte, 22 p.

Mavromati D. (2014) The Panel's right to exclude evidence based on Article 57 para. 3 CAS Code: a limit to CAS' full power of review? CAS Bulletin 2014/1. 2014. Available at: http://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Bulletin_2014-1_final_II.pdf (accessed: 12.10. 2018)

Mavromati D., Reeb M. (2015) The Code of the Court of Arbitration for Sport: Commentary, Cases and Materials. Alphen an den Rijn: Kluwer Law International, 695 p.

Pentsov D.A. Norms of international sport law in the Sport Arbitration and the Federal Tribunal in Switzerland in 2016-2017. Novye gorizonty mezhdunarodnogo arbitrazha, issue 4 (in Russian)

Reeb M (ed.) (2002) Digest of CAS Awards I11998-2000. The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 900 p.

Reeb M. (ed) (1998) Digest of CAS Awards I 1986-1998. The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 665 p.

Scherer M. (2011) Calling a witness (too) late in the proceedings'. Kluwer Arbitration Blog. September 15. Available at: http://arbitrationblog.kluwerarbitration.com/2011/09/15/calling-a-witness-too-late-in-the-proceedings (accessed: 12.10.2018)

Vostrikova E.A. (2012) Legal regulation of international Olympic sport. Candidate of Juridical Sciences Thesis. Moscow, 141 p. (in Russian)

Published
2019-03-11
How to Cite
VasilyevI. A., KislyakovaN. N., & YurlovS. A. (2019). Issues of Using Evidence and the Process of Proof in the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). Law. Journal of the Higher School of Economics, (5), 167-198. https://doi.org/10.17323/2072-8166.2019.5.167.198
Section
Law in the Modern World