安德森等诉国际奥委会案评析

发布时间：2018-03-14 12:53

本文选题：国际体育仲裁院　切入点：法律规则适用　出处：《湖南师范大学》2016年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：国际体育仲裁法庭(Court of Arbitration for Sports,简称CAS),是裁判体育项目纷争的一个国际仲裁机构。一般来说,国际体育仲裁法庭只有在争议双方都决定将案件提交到仲裁法庭的情况下才有管辖权。国际体育仲裁法庭(CAS)将仲裁程序分为三类:普通仲裁,上诉仲裁和特别仲裁。安德森等诉国际奥委会案(CAS2008/A/1545)是国际体育仲裁院裁决的上诉案件之一。国际体育仲裁院判决:安德森等七位2000年悉尼奥运会美国女子接力队队员所获的赛事成绩不应该被取消,此前国际奥委会因其队友女飞人马里昂.琼斯个人服用兴奋剂而取消整个接力团队成绩并收回奖牌。此案争议的焦点在于按照2000年悉尼奥运会的有效适用规则,由于一个成员(马里昂.琼斯)承认触犯反兴奋剂条例而被事后取消比赛资格,美国田径队在女子4×100、4×400米接力赛中的成绩是否应被取消,奖牌是否应被收回。针对这一焦点,国际体育仲裁法庭在审理过程中,集中于处理适用什么样的体育规则、规则版本的适用遵循法不溯及既往原则以及CAS先例的作用。通过长期的实践,国际体育争端解决机构在规则的使用上逐渐形成了包括体育组织自治规则优先适用、一般法律原则替代适用、各国法律有条件适用的特有模式。同时,体育自治规则优先适用的范围是有限的,在庞杂的体育自治规则体系中,只有在体育机构的章程、规则或者守则中规定的条文,才能够被视为可参考的文本。关于适用规则的不同版本,法不溯及既往原则作为一项普遍规则,过渡性或者跨时空的问题受到“依行为时间”原则的管辖,认为任何行为应该受到它发生时的法律调整。换言之,新规则不能追溯适用于在它们生效之前所发生的事实,但能适用于将来。在国际体育仲裁中,援引先前同类裁决是十分普遍的,以致达到了形成一个事实上的判例法的程度。但是,国际体育仲裁法庭从未正式承认过,法律适用中存在着遵循先例的普遍性原则,其认为先例只被作为选择性的法律依据。它的适用有助于完善仲裁庭裁决的理据,有利于体育仲裁机制在整体上实现法律适用的一致性和稳定性,但就当前而言却并不构成对仲裁庭的强制性约束。
[Abstract]:The Court of Arbitration for Sports is an international arbitration body that adjudicates disputes over sports events. The International Sports Arbitration Tribunal shall have jurisdiction only if both parties to the dispute decide to refer the case to the arbitral tribunal. Appeal arbitration and special arbitration. Anderson et al. v. IOC / CAS / 2008 / A / 1545) is one of the appeal cases decided by the International Court of Sport Arbitration. Decision of the International Court of Sport Arbitration: Anderson et al. Seven American Women's Relay teams for the Sydney Olympic Games in 2000. The team's results should not be cancelled. The controversy over the IOC's decision to cancel the relay team and withdraw its medals after her teammate Marion Jones took doping on her own has focused on effective rules for the Sydney Olympics on 2000. After a member (Marion Jones) admitted to violating anti-doping rules and was disqualified after the event, whether the United States track and field team's results in the women's 4 脳 100 + 4 脳 400 meter relay should be cancelled and whether the medals should be withdrawn. In the course of the proceedings, the International Sports Arbitration Court focuses on what sports rules should be applied, the application of the rules in accordance with the principle of non-retroactivity and the role of CAS precedents. The use of rules by international sports dispute settlement bodies has gradually formed a unique pattern, which includes preferential application of the autonomy rules of sports organizations, substitution of general principles of law, conditional application of national laws, etc. At the same time, The scope of preferential application of sports autonomy rules is limited. In the complex system of sports autonomy rules, only the provisions stipulated in the articles of association, rules or codes of sports organizations, As for the different versions of the applicable rules, the principle of non-retroactivity, as a general rule, is governed by the principle of "time of conduct", Considering that any act should be governed by the law at the time it occurs... in other words, the new rules cannot apply retroactively to facts that occurred before they came into force, but can be applied in the future... in international sports arbitration, The invocation of similar previous awards is so widespread that it has reached the point of forming a de facto case law... however, the International Sports Arbitration Tribunal has never formally recognized the existence of the principle of universality of precedents in the application of the law, In its view, precedent is only used as a selective legal basis. Its application contributes to the improvement of the rationale of the arbitral tribunal's decision and helps the sports arbitration mechanism to achieve consistency and stability in the application of the law as a whole. However, for the time being, it does not constitute a mandatory constraint on the arbitral tribunal.
【学位授予单位】：湖南师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2016
【分类号】：D997.4

【相似文献】