The Extraordinary Congress of the International Basketball Federation (FIBA), convened in Istanbul on Sunday 16 March, unanimously adopted new General Statutes that will bring changes to the governance structure of FIBA. Dr. Dirk-Reiner Martens and Andreas Zagklis advised in the development of the new structure and the drafting of the respective modifications, which include the creation of an Executive Committee and the appointment of an NBA representative on the FIBA Central Board. The new governance structure will strengthen the organisation in view of future challenges and strategic growth opportunities and is believed to be unique in the world of international sports federations.
For the full text of FIBA's press release, please click here.
In the first issue of the European International Arbitration Review's (EIAR) second volume (2013), Heiner Kahlert comparies a number of European jurisdictions as to confidentiality in arbitration. The treatise explains that there are numerous common features, including in particular the presumption of privacy, confidentiality obligations of arbitrators and a vast autonomy of the parties to agree on the level of confidentiality. The biggest discrepancy between jurisdictions relates to the question of whether parties to arbitration are bound by a broad confidentiality obligation even if there is no agreement to this effect – even on this issue, however, the differences are smaller than they may initially seem.
The exact reference to the article can be found in "publications".
In the Sports Law and Policy Centre's "THE EUROPEAN SPORTS LAW AND POLICY BULLETIN, ISSUE 1-2013, INTERNATIONAL AND COMPARATIVE SPORTS JUSTICE, Andreas Zagklis traces in two chapters the development and evolution of the internal dispute resolution process of the international sports federations.
Andreas Zagklis (as of page 114) analyses the Fédération Internationale de Basketball's (“FIBA”) internal and external dispute resolution mechanisms, highlighted by the innovative Basketball Arbitration Tribunal (“BAT”), that allow parties a fair, quick, and cost-efficient resolution to the various types of disputes that arise in basketball. Andreas Zagklis and Achilleas Mavromatis (as of page 130) illustrate the steps taken by Fédération Internationale de Volleyball (“FIVB”) towards the restructuring of its dispute resolution system. The starting point is FIVB’s initial resistance to embrace the jurisdiction of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (“CAS”). Following the abolition of its own judicial body called the International Volleyball Tribunal, FIVB approved CAS as the last instance appeals body for all disputes arising within the FIVB family and revised the lower-instance, internal dispute resolution procedures. In this respect, the authors present the new role of CAS as the ultimate appeals body in the FIVB’s dispute resolution system, describe the three types of disputes that are heard by the FIVB according to a new categorisation system and present the newly constituted FIVB judicial bodies. For further information and the contents page of the publication please clickhere.
Martens Rechstanwälte represent the Internationl Skating Union (ICU) in the proceedings aigainst Claudia Pechstein before the District Court of Munich. Please find the link to the TV coverage by the Bayerische Rundfunk (BR) here.
Christian Keidel and Andreas Zagklis (Martens Lawyers) represent Fenerbahçe S.K. in UEFA disciplinary proceedings and before CAS On 25 June 2013, the UEFA Control- and Disciplinary Body decided to exclude Fenerbahçe from the next three UEFA competitions for which it would qualify (the ban for the third season was suspended for a probationary period of five years). Following an appeal by Fenerbahçe against this decision, the UEFA Appeals Body partially lifted the ban and decided to exclude the Club from the next two UEFA competitions for which it would qualify. Fenerbahçe appealed against this decision to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). On 18 July 2013, CAS confirmed that UEFA had agreed with the requested stay of the challenged decision until CAS renders a final award. Therefore, Fenerbahçe is provisionally allowed to participate in the UEFA Champions League 2013/14. CAS will render its final decision on 28 August 2013.
Please find CAS' press release here: http://www.tas-cas.org/en/infogenerales.asp/4-3-6956-1092-4-1-1/5-0-1092-15
In the third issue of the legal journal "Sport und Recht" (SpuRt) in 2013, Heiner Kahlert and Andreas Zagklis comment on a recent decision of the Swiss Federal Tribunal (SFT). The decision concerned a request for annulment of an arbitral award by the Basketball Arbitral Tribunal (BAT), which was rendered without reasons in accordance with the BAT Arbitration Rules due to the low value of the dispute.
Heiner Kahlert and Andreas Zagklis first provide some explanations on the structure and the special features of the BAT before they comment on the most important issues decided upon by the SFT. In particular, it is noteworthy that the SFT decided that the BAT is a true arbitral tribunal within the meaning of the Swiss Private International Law Act (PILA). Furthermore, it should be endorsed that the SFT clarified that there are no objections to be raised against arbitral proceedings being conducted by email, and that email read receipts are a proper way of proving delivery of such communication. Lastly, the authors support the SFT's view that a request for annulment can be filed also against awards without reasons, even though the scope of scrutiny is necessarily limited.
Andreas Zagklis was interviewed by Mr. Hajo Seppelt for the TV programme of the WDR "Sport Inside - Bitte recht freundlich" regarding international doping test procedures. For the video of the the Sport Inside broadcast, click here.
On 3 May 2013 the European Volleyball Confederation (CEV) organised a Management Seminar with 41 national federations in attendance. Andreas Zagklis reported on legal issues in connection with international transfer certificates and legal proceedings arising from disputes between players, coaches and clubs. For the full CEV news and photo gallery, click here.
The case of the Nigerian goalkeeper Ikenna Onokogu, who became the victim of racist taunts before being temporarily suspended by the competent federation for “provisional protection of the gaming operations”, has attracted German-wide media attention (see, for example, article in the FAZ, Spiegel and SportBild). Heiner Kahlert of Martens Lawyers is representing Ikenna Onukogu, whose preliminary suspension has in the meantime been lifted, in the ongoing proceedings before the competent federation.
Dirk-Reiner Martens kommentiert die Chancen für Rechtsanwälte im Bereich des "Sportrechts". Den vollständigen Text des Artikels finden Sie hier.
In the 1/2013 ISLA newsletter, Christian Keidel discusses decisions of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS): Bursaspor v. UEFA, 10 July 2012 (CAS 2012/A/2821) and Besikats v. UEFA, 31 October 2012 (CAS 2012/A/2824). Martens Lawyers successfully represented Bursaspor in the aforementioned proceedings. For the full text of the ISLA Newsletter please click here.
Basketball Arbitral Tribunal (BAT) receives Swiss Federal Tribunal Blessing In a 14 December 2012 ruling, the Swiss Federal Tribunal (Tribunal) dealt with a request pursuant to Article 190(2) of the Swiss Code on Private International Law (PILA) to set aside an award rendered under the BAT rules. The Tribunal found that the "objet du recours .... ne fait problème en l'espèce" ["the object of the appeal does not present any problems in this case"]. This short note means that the Tribunal has recognised the BAT as a true arbitral tribunal under Swiss law. This follows from the fact that only "arbitral awards" can be the subject matter of an appeal under Article 190(2) PILA.
In its decision, the Tribunal also put an end to a debate which had divided the judiciary at the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS): The Tribunal ruled that the request for review was admissible even though the BAT award had been rendered without reasons, as allowed under the BAT rules in so-called "low value cases", and the Appellant had failed to exercise her right to request the reasons for the award. The first appeal of a BAT award was rejected by the Tribunal 29 May 2012 on the grounds that the applicable arbitration clause provided for a waiver of the right of appeal as allowed under Article 192 PILA for cases in which neither party is Swiss. As of 31 January 2013, a total 367 requests for arbitration have been registered by the BAT since the first case was filed in 2007.
The Basketball Arbitral Tribunal (BAT) is nominated for the GAR Awards 2013.
On 6 February 2013 the Global Arbitration Review (GAR) unveiled the shortlist of candidates nominated for the GAR Awards 2013. BAT is nominated in the section "Innovation by an individual or organisation". For further information, click here.