里约奥运会体育仲裁案件研究

发布时间：2018-05-06 09:01

本文选题：里约奥运会 + 体育仲裁　；参考：《湘潭大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：第31届奥运会在里约热内卢成功举办,奥运会举办期间国际体育仲裁院在里约热内卢设立了临时仲裁机构。作为奥运会期间体育争议的解决机构,临时仲裁机构在往届奥运会专指特别仲裁庭。但是在里约奥运会,临时仲裁机构的内容得以丰富,不仅包括特别仲裁庭,还包括反兴奋剂仲裁庭。两个仲裁庭共同负责解决奥运会期间产生的体育纠纷。反兴奋剂仲裁庭作为新设立的体育纠纷解决机构,其适用的规则为《反兴奋剂仲裁庭仲裁规则》,该仲裁规则为国际体育仲裁理事会专门制定,与特别仲裁庭的仲裁规则既一脉相承又各具特点。在里约奥运会期间两个仲裁庭共审理仲裁案件36起,反兴奋剂仲裁庭审理案件8起,特别仲裁庭审理案件28起。特别仲裁庭审理的案件中,参赛资格案件23起,兴奋剂案件2起,比赛裁判结果案件2起和纪律案件1起。反兴奋剂仲裁庭审理的案件中,兴奋剂案件7起,参赛资格案件1起,其中审理的参赛资格案件被裁决无管辖权。两个仲裁庭在案件的管辖权上存在明显的区别。反兴奋剂仲裁庭对案件的管辖有更多的限制,必须是兴奋剂案件,由国际奥委会宣布存在违反反兴奋剂规则的行为并由其作为申请人提起仲裁,反兴奋剂仲裁庭才对案件拥有管辖权。而特别仲裁庭审理的案件只要是奥运会期间或与奥运会有关的争议均拥有管辖权。里约奥运会的体育仲裁实践有值得肯定的一面,如:遵循了以往的裁判规则、设立了新的反兴奋剂仲裁机构,也反映出了目前奥运会体育仲裁所存在的问题,如:案件受理审查的缺陷、案件移送管辖法律规定的缺失。通过对里约奥运会体育仲裁案件的整体思考,得出对运动员、国际单项体育组织,我国国家奥委会的启示。
[Abstract]:The 31 st Olympic Games were successfully held in Rio de Janeiro. During the Olympic Games, the International Court of Sports Arbitration set up an interim arbitration institution in Rio de Janeiro. As the sports dispute settlement organization during the Olympic Games, the ad hoc arbitration institution referred to the special arbitration tribunal in the past Olympic Games. But at the Rio Olympics, the ad hoc arbitration body was enriched, including not only the ad hoc tribunal, but also the anti-doping tribunal. The two arbitral tribunals are jointly responsible for resolving sports disputes arising during the Olympic Games. As a newly established sports dispute settlement body, the rules applicable by the Anti-Doping Arbitration Tribunal are the Arbitration rules of the Anti-Doping Arbitration Tribunal, which are specially formulated by the International Sports Arbitration Council, And the arbitration rules of the special arbitration tribunal are in the same line and have their own characteristics. During the Rio Olympics, the two arbitral tribunals heard 36 arbitration cases, the anti-doping tribunal heard 8 cases, and the special tribunal heard 28 cases. Among the cases heard by the Special Arbitration Tribunal, there were 23 cases of eligibility, 2 cases of doping, 2 cases of results of competition decisions and 1 case of discipline. Among the cases heard by the Anti-Doping Arbitration Tribunal, there were seven cases of doping and one case of eligibility for participation, in which the cases heard were ruled without jurisdiction. There is a clear difference between the two arbitral tribunals in the jurisdiction of the case. The anti-doping tribunal has more restrictions on the jurisdiction of the case. It must be a doping case. The IOC declares the violation of the anti-doping rules and initiates the arbitration as an applicant. The anti-doping tribunal has jurisdiction over the case. The ad hoc tribunal has jurisdiction as long as it is during or related to the Olympic Games. The practice of sports arbitration in Rio Olympic Games has some positive aspects, such as following the previous rules and setting up a new anti-doping arbitration institution, which also reflects the problems existing in the Olympic sports arbitration at present. Such as: the defects of the case acceptance review, the absence of the law on the transfer of the case to jurisdiction. Through the overall consideration of the arbitration cases of the Rio Olympic Games, the enlightenment to athletes, international individual sports organizations and the National Olympic Committee of China is obtained.
【学位授予单位】：湘潭大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D925.7

【参考文献】