The following is a guest post by Ivana Hristova, a foreign law intern working with Foreign Law Specialist Jenny Gesley at the Global Legal Research Directorate of the Law Library of Congress.
From July 26 to August 11, 2024, I was captivated by the Olympic Games in Paris, France. Each night, I would huddle in front of the TV, reliving the day’s highlights. The thrill of witnessing world-class athletes in action, discovering new sports, and rooting for my favorites was unforgettable. Emotions ran high—whether celebrating a medal win or mourning a missed opportunity.
One of the most intense moments was in the women’s gymnastics floor exercise final. After the competition, Romanian gymnast Ana Bărbosu thought she had secured the bronze. However, after an appeal from the U.S. team, Jordan Chiles, who was initially in 5th place, was awarded the bronze following a score adjustment. The situation took a more dramatic turn when Bărbosu contested this decision at the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The CAS reversed the score adjustment and determined that the adjustment to Chiles’ score by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) was made too late. Consequently, Chiles’ original score was reinstated and Bărbosu was confirmed as the bronze medalist.
In an even more unexpected twist of the story, Romanian gymnast Maneca-Voinea, who finished sixth amid the bronze medal controversy, has filed an appeal with the Swiss Federal Supreme Court. She seeks to overturn the claim that she went out of bounds and to have her penalty point removed. This would result in her being tied with Bărbosu on points and potentially sharing the bronze medal with her fellow Romanian.
In this blog post, I will explore the role of the CAS, especially its role during the Olympic Games.
1. What is the CAS?
The CAS is an independent institution that resolves sports-related disputes through arbitration and mediation, governed by its own CAS Statutes. (CAS Statutes, S12.) It has three main divisions: ordinary arbitration, anti-doping, and appeals. (CAS Statutes, S3, S20.) During the Olympics, CAS operates ad hoc arbitration divisions (CAS Arbitration Rules for the Olympic Games, art. 2), one of which heard the case involving Jordan Chiles and Ana Bărbosu.
CAS employs nearly 422 arbitrators from 87 countries, all experts in arbitration and sports law. These arbitrators are appointed by the International Council of Arbitration for Sport (ICAS) which manages CAS’s administrative and financial matters, among other tasks. (ICAS Statutes, A., S2; B.) The arbitrators serve four-year terms and must have legal training, expertise in sports law, and proficiency in at least one of CAS’s working languages. (ICAS Statutes, A. S5; C., S14.) ICAS must ensure a diverse representation, considering continental and juridical perspectives. (Id. S16.)
2. Where is the CAS Located?
CAS is headquartered in Lausanne, Switzerland, with additional offices in Sydney, Australia, and New York, United States. (Procedural Rules, R28.)
During the Olympic Games, the ad hoc division can perform its duties either at the site of the Games or at any other location it deems suitable. (CAS Arbitration Rules for the Olympic Games, art. 7; Procedural Rules, R28.)
3. What Are the Official Languages of CAS Procedures?
During the Olympic Games, the ad hoc arbitration is conducted in either English or French, as decided by the President of the division. (CAS Arbitration Rules for the Olympic Games, art. 6.)
The regular working languages of the CAS include French, English and, since 2020, Spanish. Parties can request another language, which is subject to agreement by the panel and the CAS Court Office. (CAS Statutes, C., S24; Procedural Rules, R29.) As an example, in 2022, some arbitrations were conducted in Italian and German. (Annual Report, at 18.)
4. How Many Cases Does the CAS Handle Annually?
The CAS handles a wide range of cases, including disciplinary actions, contract disputes, and appeals against sports federation decisions. In 2022, CAS managed 830 new cases with 11 ad hoc arbitration proceedings during the Beijing Winter Olympics. Since its inception, the CAS has processed a total of 10,637 cases.
5. Why Was the CAS Established?
CAS was established in 1983 to address the growing number of international sports disputes and the lack of an independent body to resolve them. It is seen as an efficient and impartial system for handling sports-related conflicts, which traditional legal systems struggled to address effectively. Over time, CAS has become crucial as sports have globalized and commercialized. (Segesser/Truttmann in Geisinger/Voser, International Arbitration in Switzerland, p. 295.)
6. What Kind of Court is the CAS?
The CAS operates outside the traditional court system as an arbitration court. In general, the parties voluntarily agree to resolve their disputes through arbitration by either including a clause in their contract that specifies arbitration as the dispute resolution method or by agreeing to arbitration when a dispute arises. The arbitration process follows specific procedural rules, which can be set by the parties themselves or determined by the arbitration institution. The decision reached by the arbitrators, known as an arbitral award, is legally binding and enforceable, much like a court judgment. (Girsberger/Voser: International Arbitration in Switzerland, p. 47.)
7. What Role Does the CAS Play During the Olympic Games?
During the Olympics, CAS is instrumental through its ad hoc arbitration panel, which handles urgent issues such as disciplinary actions and eligibility disputes, and its anti-doping division. These panels work to resolve disputes quickly and in accordance with IOC rules and other governing regulations. The ad hoc division has been in operation since the 1996 Atlanta Summer Olympics. (Segesser/Truttmann in Geisinger/Voser, International Arbitration in Switzerland, p. 296.)
8. How Is the CAS’s Jurisdiction for the Olympics Regulated?
The CAS’s jurisdiction for the Olympics is governed by a combination of agreements and rules. The primary authority comes from the Olympic Charter, which mandates that disputes related to Olympic events be resolved by the CAS. (Olympic Charter, rule 61.) CAS’s jurisdiction encompasses a range of issues, including athlete eligibility and doping cases. (CAS Code, R34.)
The CAS Code details the procedures and standards for arbitration.
For Olympic disputes, the CAS Ad Hoc Rules, particularly articles 7 and 17, along with chapter 12 of the Swiss Private International Law Act (“PILA”), govern the proceedings. While the CAS Code outlines general arbitration procedures, the Ad Hoc Rules are specifically tailored for the Olympics. These regulations work together to ensure that Olympic disputes are handled consistently, fairly, and promptly.
PILA governs arbitration proceedings conducted in Switzerland, including those involving CAS. It covers the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards, the appointment of arbitrators, and other arbitration practices.
Ad hoc panels determine their own jurisdiction, regardless of any ongoing legal actions before a state court or another arbitral tribunal concerning the same matter. The panel decides based on the law chosen by the parties or, if no choice is made, according to Swiss law. (Procedural Rules, R45.) It has full authority to review both the facts and the law and can either issue a new decision to replace the challenged one or annul it and refer the case back to the previous instance. Additionally, the president of the panel may request access to the file(s) of the federation, association, or sports-related body involved in the appeal. (Procedural Rules, R57.)
9. How Can Olympic Athletes Challenge a Ruling?
To challenge a ruling, the applicant must submit a written application in English or French to the CAS Court Office, outlining the decision being contested, a summary of the facts and legal arguments, and the relief sought. (Arbitration Rules for the Olympic Games, art. 10.)
A panel of three arbitrators will review the case and decide based on the Olympic Charter, general legal principles, and relevant laws. The panel may issue a final award, refer the dispute to CAS for further arbitration under the Code of Sports-related Arbitration, or resolve some aspects of the dispute while transferring unresolved issues to regular CAS procedures. (Arts. 11, 14,17 and 20; Procedural Rules, R38.)
10. Who Can Review a CAS Decision?
The CAS decision takes immediate effect and is final and binding. (Arbitration Rules for the Olympic Games, art. 21.) However, it can be challenged under Swiss Law in specific circumstances outlined in article 190 PILA. Even though ad hoc divisions operate at the site of the Olympic Games, the seat of the ad hoc divisions remains in Lausanne, Switzerland. (CAS Code, R28.) Therefore Chapter 12 of PILA always applies, and any challenge must be brought before the Swiss Federal Supreme Court. (Segesser/Truttmann in Geisinger/Voser, International Arbitration in Switzerland, p. 297.)
The Swiss Federal Supreme Court is the judicial authority responsible for reviewing applications for revision of any international arbitral award, including final, partial, or interlocutory awards, thus overseeing CAS decisions. (Tribunal fédéral, arrêt du 22 décembre 2020, Point 4.1.) For example, in 2021, the Federal Supreme Court ordered a new trial for Chinese swimmer Sun Yang due to concerns about bias from a CAS panelist. The court reviewed the case to ensure that CAS followed fundamental principles of fairness and public order. USA Gymnastics has stated that it will “continue to pursue every possible venue and appeal process, including to the Swiss Federal Tribunal, to ensure the just scoring, placement, and medal award for Jordan.”
11. Will Jordan Chiles Have to Return Her Bronze Medal?
According to the IOC’s decision, Jordan Chiles will indeed need to return her bronze medal. The final rankings are determined by the Federation Internationale de Gymnastique, but in line with the CAS decision, Ana Bărbosu will be awarded the bronze, with Chiles moving to fifth place.
12. Where Can I Find Additional Resources on CAS or the Olympics?
-
- Daniel Girsberger and Nathalie Voser, International Arbitration in Switzerland (2016)
- Elliott Geisinger and Nathalie Voser, International Arbitration in Switzerland, A Handbook for Practitioners (2013)
- Despina Mavromati, The Code of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (2015)
- Helen Lenskyj, Gener, Athletes’ Rights and the Court of Arbitration for Sport (2018)
- Paul David, A Guide to the World Anti-Doping Code: the Fight for the Spirit of Sport (2017)
- Felix Beulke, Global Anti-Doping Rules – an Overview (2016)
Subscribe to In Custodia Legis – it’s free! – to receive interesting posts drawn from the Law Library of Congress’s vast collections and our staff’s expertise in U.S., foreign, and international law.