Search

This compilation includes a selection of the most important judgments rendered in 2023 by the Swiss Federal Supreme Court (SFT) relating to applications to set aside awards rendered by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). Beyond reiterating the high admissibility threshold, the SFT has confirmed its strict view of public policy violation grievances when discussing, among others, excessive formalism, the hearing of protected witnesses, the existence of parallel proceedings at the national - and the international level and the European Convention of Human Rights. The SFT also highlighted the specificities of CAS arbitration proceedings in the CAS jurisdiction to hear a set-off claim or the parties' duty to examine notorious facts related to the appointment of arbitrators. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article focuses on the award of 14 February 2022, rendered by the CAS ad hoc chamber in the appeal filed by IOC, ISU and WADA against the decision of the RUSADA Disciplinary Committee lifting the provisional suspension of Kamila Valieva. Kamila Valieva is one of the world's best 15-year-old figure skaters. Prior to the Beijing Olympic Games, she tested positive for a substance prohibited in and out of competition under the WADC and was provisionally suspended. Her suspension was lifted by the RUSADA Disciplinary Committee, and the case was brought before the CAS. Because of her young age, Valieva is a minor and therefore a protected person according to the WADC. The CAS concluded that the Code, by setting up a system of sanctions for these protected persons but not providing for any temporary sanctions, contained a lacuna that it had to fill. However, the identification of the gap and the interpretation of the rules by CAS is questionable in this award.

Copyright of Právník is the property of Czech Academy of Sciences, Institute of State & Law and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Contrary to popular perception of the legal profession, multi-tier arbitrations are neither new, nor uncommon phenomenon. With growing need of the community to arbitration becomes real, not just theoretical, alternative to judicial resolution of disputes, arbitration accepts more judicial characteristics, among which is one of the most important and at the same time controversial - multi-tiered dispute resolution. Multi-tiered arbitration proceeding is traditionally present in commercial and investment arbitrations. However, in recent decades, significant international arbitration institutions introduced the option for consensual review of arbitration awards. Sports law is an area where, by the end of the twentieth century, the phenomenon was unnoticed present. The international sports community, as a precondition for the survival of autonomous settlement of disputes, choose dispute settlement by arbitration, but with a number of significant modifications. One of the most specific is multi-tiered arbitration, especially regarding the most important cases. The main reason for such behaviour is the aspiration of the international sports community, following the example of national courts, to organize efficient, quality and final way of resolving disputes within its jurisdiction. Permanent Court of arbitration of the Olympic Committee of Serbia follows the mentioned logic, thanks to the provisions of the Sports Act and contrary to the Arbitration act, and introduces the possibility of reviewing its decision in front of the Court of arbitration for sport based in Lausanne.

Copyright of Journal of International Trade & Arbitration Law / Uluslararasi Ticaret ve Tahkim Hukuku Dergisi is the property of Journal of International Trade & Arbitration Law / Uluslararasi Ticaret ve Tahkim Hukuku Dergisi and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Abstract: Beta2-adrenergic agonists, or β2-agonists, are considered essential bronchodilator drugs in the treatment of bronchial asthma, both as symptom-relievers and, in combination with inhaled corticosteroids, as disease-controllers. The use of β2-agonists is prohibited in sports by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) due to claimed anabolic effects, and also, is prohibited as growth promoters in cattle fattening in the European Union. This paper reviews the last seven-year (2006–2012) literature concerning the development of novel β2-agonists molecules either by modifying the molecule of known β2-agonists or by introducing moieties producing indole-, adamantyl- or phenyl urea derivatives. New emerging β2-agonists molecules for future therapeutic use are also presented, intending to emphasize their potential use for doping purposes or as growth promoters in the near future. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]