@ARTICLE{26583261_337268251_2019, author = {I.A. Vasil'ev and N.N. Kislyakova and S.A. Yurlov}, keywords = {, sports arbitration, CAS, evidences, presumption of innocence, standards of proof, disciplinary liabilitysports liability}, title = {Issues of Using Evidence and the Process of Proof in the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS)}, journal = {}, year = {2019}, number = {5}, pages = {167-198}, url = {https://law-journal.hse.ru/en/2019--5/337268251.html}, publisher = {}, abstract = {Dispute resolution in the Court of Arbitration for Sport (hereinafter: "CAS") has certainspecificity that makes CAS different not only from other institutions for sports disputesresolution but also from commercial and investment arbitration. The following researchpaper brings light to such specific issues related to CAS as to presumption of innocence inthe area of sport, using different standards of proof ("comfortable satisfaction", "beyondreasonable doubts" and "balance of probabilities"), issue of using evidence obtained in anillegal way in match-fixing disputes. The authors also referred to the issues of certain artsof evidence that would be unusual for commercial arbitration, but which are commonlyused in CAS, issues of not allowing new evidence in appeal proceedings, the issue ofnecessity 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 thegiven time limits. As for the methodology that the authors used, these widely spread inlegal research methods include analysis of international legal sources, analysis normsof sports bodies, a decision of disciplinary bodies and CAS awards, making conclusionsregarding certain issues and problems, defining the specificity of evidence and methodsof proving in CAS. The conclusions proposed by the authors made help to form newapproaches for implementation of a presumption of innocence principle in the area ofsport and show an attitude of sports organizations and CAS towards certain remedies.For citation: Vasilyev I.A., Kisliakova N.N., Yurlov S.A. (2019) Issues of Using Evidence and Process of Proof in the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). Pravo. Zhurnal Vysshey shkoly ekonomiki, no 5, pp. 167-198 (in Russian) DOI: 10.17323/2072-8166.2019.5.167.198}, annote = {Dispute resolution in the Court of Arbitration for Sport (hereinafter: "CAS") has certainspecificity that makes CAS different not only from other institutions for sports disputesresolution but also from commercial and investment arbitration. The following researchpaper brings light to such specific issues related to CAS as to presumption of innocence inthe area of sport, using different standards of proof ("comfortable satisfaction", "beyondreasonable doubts" and "balance of probabilities"), issue of using evidence obtained in anillegal way in match-fixing disputes. The authors also referred to the issues of certain artsof evidence that would be unusual for commercial arbitration, but which are commonlyused in CAS, issues of not allowing new evidence in appeal proceedings, the issue ofnecessity 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 thegiven time limits. As for the methodology that the authors used, these widely spread inlegal research methods include analysis of international legal sources, analysis normsof sports bodies, a decision of disciplinary bodies and CAS awards, making conclusionsregarding certain issues and problems, defining the specificity of evidence and methodsof proving in CAS. The conclusions proposed by the authors made help to form newapproaches for implementation of a presumption of innocence principle in the area ofsport and show an attitude of sports organizations and CAS towards certain remedies.For citation: Vasilyev I.A., Kisliakova N.N., Yurlov S.A. (2019) Issues of Using Evidence and Process of Proof in the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). Pravo. Zhurnal Vysshey shkoly ekonomiki, no 5, pp. 167-198 (in Russian) DOI: 10.17323/2072-8166.2019.5.167.198} }