EU's Top Court Diminishes Sports Court's Authority - European Union Judicial Body
The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), based in Lausanne, Switzerland, plays a pivotal role in deciding various sports-related matters, including disciplinary sanctions, transfer permits, and doping bans. However, recent developments have introduced a new dimension to the CAS's decisions, particularly within the European Union (EU).
The European Court of Justice (ECJ), situated in Luxembourg, has ruled that it must be possible to judicially review CAS decisions for compatibility with the public policy of the EU. This ruling allows national courts within the EU to scrutinise CAS decisions, potentially impacting their finality in EU countries.
The ECJ's ruling aligns with an evolving trend where sport governing bodies and arbitration decisions must comply with human rights and EU law standards. For instance, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has signalled that CAS decisions could be subject to human rights scrutiny, particularly on grounds such as discrimination and effective remedy rights. If the ECtHR Grand Chamber confirms this approach, it would set a precedent allowing rights-holders to challenge CAS awards at the ECtHR level, thus diminishing the absolute finality traditionally attributed to CAS rulings.
The ban on third-party ownership of players' economic rights, established in the regulations of FIFA, UEFA, and national associations, is another area where the ECJ's rulings have implications. The Belgian football club RFC Seraing is currently in dispute with FIFA over this issue.
In summary, while the CAS is an independent arbitration body whose awards have generally been seen as final and binding, recent developments indicate that their decisions may not be entirely immune from review by EU courts or human rights courts. The Swiss Federal Tribunal, previously the last resort in sports law for athletes and associations, may now see fewer CAS cases due to the potential for judicial review by national courts within the EU.
The international sports community aims to maintain a uniform interpretation of sports regulations through the CAS. However, the ECJ's ruling has introduced a new layer of complexity, as CAS decisions within the EU may be susceptible to further legal review beyond CAS, notably through the ECtHR or potentially EU courts. This challenges the perception of CAS awards as definitively final within the EU legal space.
| Body | Effect on CAS Decision Finality | |-------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------| | Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) | Awards traditionally final and binding | | European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) | Can review CAS decisions on human rights grounds, reducing absolute finality | | European Court of Justice (ECJ) | EU law principles may influence review or interpretation of CAS decisions, potentially limiting finality within EU jurisdiction |
- The European Court of Justice's (ECJ) ruling has implications for the employment policy of sports governing bodies, such as FIFA and UEFA, as national courts within the EU are now empowered to scrutinize decisions made by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), potentially impacting the finality of CAS decisions in EU countries.
- The ECJ's ruling also aligns with a broader trend in EU law, where sport governing bodies and arbitration decisions must abide by human rights and EU law standards, which may lead to challenges against CAS awards at the European Court of Human Rights level, further impacting the absolute finality traditionally attributed to CAS rulings.
