Abstract
Sports law and Swiss law are closely connected. It is at first quite complex to perceive the real implications of Swiss law, in which way it applies as well as its concrete consequences in sport. To understand the relation between Swiss law and international sport, the present article will analyze the concepts, rules and principles of Swiss law which apply in this area (i.e., Swiss association law, contract law and protection of legal personality). Knowledge of Swiss law for athletes, teams and federation is fundamental. It is the first step to develop coherent and powerful strategy before the Court of Arbitration for Sport or internal judicial bodies of international federations. A general overview of the importance of Swiss law appears to be very valuable to understand the context of sports law. Also, the protection of legal personality as the core principle of sports law is of a primordial importance in sports law and it will be developed in this contribution. The specific influence of equality of treatment between athletes will be discussed, too. This principle is fundamental in sport and is one of the purposes of a uniform application of (Swiss) law in sport.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
Most of the international sports federations (“IFs”) have their seat in Switzerland as well as the International Olympic Committee (“IOC”) and the Court of Arbitration for Sport (“CAS”). Therefore, many principles of Swiss law apply to the functioning and the making-decision process of these organisations. Swiss law is perceived as neutral and consistent, which leads to its frequent voluntary application in the contractual sports area. Below, we will explain the main ways in which Swiss law applies to international sport. We will also develop the most significant principles of Swiss law frequently applied (i.e., Swiss association law, contract law, international private law and the particular protection of legal personality). In connection with these developments, we will demonstrate the link between the global application of this legal framework and the necessity of equality of treatment among competitors.
2 When does Swiss law apply in the context of international sport?
Below, we will describe when does Swiss law applies in every international sporting relation or proceedings. Basically, Swiss law can be found “nearly everywhere”. The prevalence of Swiss law can be seen as a necessity to ensure equal treatment of every athlete around the world.
2.1 Swiss association law as the legal framework for international sports federations
The most widely used legal entity for IFs is the “association under Swiss law”. The liberal nature of statutory provisions applicable to associations in Switzerland is the main reason for the popularity of this legal form.Footnote 1 Also, the proximity with the seat of the IOC (Lausanne) is a key factor for the establishment of IFs’ seats in Switzerland.
So the vast majority of IFs have their seat in Switzerland and are formed as “association under Swiss law” according to Articles 60 ff Swiss Civil Code (“SCC”), such as the International Federation for Equestrian Sports (“FEI”), the International Basketball Federation (“FIBA”), the International Chess Federation (“FIDE”), the International Fencing Federation (“FIE”), the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (“FIFA”), the International Gymnastics Federation (“FIG”), the International Hockey Federation hockey (“FIH”), the Fédération Internationale de Motocyclisme (“FIM”), the International Ski and Snowboard Federation (“FIS”), the International Volleyball Federation (“FIVB”), the International Boxing Association (“IBA”), the International Bobsleigh and Skeleton Federation (“IBSF”), the International Golf Federation (“IGF”), the International Handball Federation (“IHF”), the International Ice Hockey Federation (“IIHF”), the International Judo Federation (“IJF”), the International Skating Union (“ISU”), the International Table Tennis Federation (“ITTF”), the International Weightlifting Federation (“IWF”), the International Cycling Union (“UCI”), the United World Wrestling (“UWW”), World Archery, World Aquatics, the World Bridge Federation (“WBF”), the World Baseball and Softball Confederation (“WBSC”), the World Curling Federation (“WCF”), World Rowing and World Triathlon.Footnote 2 Besides, the IOC is also an association under Swiss law,Footnote 3 as well as other important international sports organisations such as the Association of National Olympic Committees (“ANOC”), the Association of IOC Recognised International Sport Federation (“ARISF”) and the Association of Summer Olympic International Federations (“ASOIF”).Footnote 4
Furthermore, most national sports organisations headquartered in Switzerland are established as associations governed by Swiss law. Finally, the World Anti-Doping Agency (“WADA”) is a foundation under Swiss law and is governed by Articles 80 ff SCC.Footnote 5
Consequently, and except for WADA, Swiss association law is the legal framework applicable to the functioning, the decision-making process, the hierarchy of norms and the appeal against the decisions of these organisations, although their activities are essentially international, and the competitors are predominantly not Swiss citizens.
2.2 Swiss contract law as the law chosen by the parties to a contractual relationship
Swiss law is frequently chosen as the law applicable in relation to sporting events agreements between IFs and host cities. For example, Article 51.1 of the IOC Host City Contract 2024 Paris states that the “contract is exclusively governed by the substantive, internal laws of Switzerland”. The FIS and the IHF include also similar clauses in their contracts for the organisation of sporting events.Footnote 6
Besides, when a contract involves parties from different countries (i.e. transfer agreements in team sports), Swiss law is often chosen as a neutral and fair law (as well as the law that governs the IF). A large amount of transfer agreements, loan agreements or economic rights participation agreements (ERPA) in football show a prevalence of Swiss law as the law applicable to the contract, although often no parties come from Switzerland.
2.3 Swiss international private law as the lex arbitri for CAS proceedings
According to Article 176(1) of the Federal Act on Private International Law (“PILA” or “PILS”), “the provisions of [Chapter 12 PILA] apply to arbitral tribunals that have their seat in Switzerland”. In view of R28 CAS Code 2023, the seat of CAS and each Arbitration Panel is Lausanne (Switzerland), even when CAS acts in ad hoc divisions and, in any event, irrespective of the domicile of the arbitrators or where the hearing actually takes place.Footnote 7 As a result, Chapter 12 PILA, related to International Arbitration, is applicable for every procedure before the CAS as the lex arbitriFootnote 8 (i.e., the law governing the procedure before arbitral tribunal).
The provisions contained in this chapter cover in particular the following topics: the concept of international arbitration,Footnote 9 the arbitrability of the dispute,Footnote 10 the arbitration agreement,Footnote 11 the powers of the supporting judgeFootnote 12 and the law applicable to the merits.Footnote 13 The appeal against CAS awards must only be made before the Swiss Supreme Court (“SSC”).Footnote 14 The grounds for appeal before this court can be found in Article 190(2) PILA.Footnote 15
2.4 Swiss law as the law applicable to the merits
2.4.1 Before the internal bodies of international sports federations
Swiss law often applies before IFs’ internal bodies. For example, World Rowing provides that their ‘judicial bodies […] shall apply Swiss law and the rules of the Swiss federal procedure’.Footnote 16 Similarly, the FEI states that, before the FEI Tribunal, ‘[a]ll disputes shall be settled in accordance with Swiss law’.Footnote 17 In short, Swiss law often already applies before IFs’ internal bodies, at least subsidiarily, either by a special provision in their regulations or by the fact that their seat is situated in Switzerland.
2.4.2 Before the Court of Arbitration for Sport
Nowadays, almost all IFs include an arbitration clause in favour of CAS in their statutes (IFs withFootnote 18 or withoutFootnote 19 their seat in Switzerland). In addition, IFs often include an arbitration clause in their contractual relationships with athletes.Footnote 20 The exclusivity of CAS’ jurisdiction depends on the extent of every arbitration clause.Footnote 21 Also, in relation to doping cases and following Article 13.2.1 WADA World Anti-Doping Code 2021, “[i]n cases arising from participation in an International Event or in cases involving International-Level Athletes, the decision may be appealed exclusively to CAS”.
To determine the law applicable to the merits before CAS, it is necessary to look at the lex arbitriFootnote 22 (Chapter 12 PILA, as explained above). The fact that the seat of the arbitration is situated in Switzerland does not necessary imply that Swiss law will apply to the merits of the dispute.Footnote 23 Following Article 187(1) PILA, “[t]he arbitral tribunal shall decide the dispute according to the rules of law chosen by the parties or, in the absence of such a choice, according to the rules of law with which the case has the closest connection”.Footnote 24 Swiss arbitration law is particularly liberal (arbitration-friendly) and flexible.Footnote 25 Articles 187(1) PILA, R45 and R58 CAS Code 2023 allow the parties to choose non-state law,Footnote 26 with a private originFootnote 27 (i.e., the regulations of an IF), as the law applicable to the merits.Footnote 28
Regarding R45 CAS Code 2023, for ordinary proceedings, “[t]he Panel shall decide the dispute according to the rules of law chosen by the parties or, in the absence of such a choice, according to Swiss law”. This article demonstrates the prevalence of the party autonomy, as such as Swiss law.Footnote 29 The choice of law is “direct” when the parties expressly submit the contract to a specific law or set of rules of law. Conversely, the choice is “indirect” when the parties in the main contract refer to the applicable regulation or a “conflict-of-law” provision which, in turn, contains a governing law provision.Footnote 30
Following R58 CAS Code 2023, for appeal proceedings, “[t]he Panel shall decide the dispute according to the applicable regulations and, subsidiarily, to the rules of law chosen by the parties or, in the absence of such a choice, according to the law of the country in which the federation, association or sports-related body which has issued the challenged decision is domiciled or according to the rules of law that the Panel deems appropriate”. This article shows the importance of the applicable regulations as the rules of law chosen by the parties.Footnote 31 IFs’ statutes incorporate this system by specifying that, firstly, their rules are applicable and, subsidiarily, Swiss law applies, especially for FIFA, IBA, IHF and IIHF.Footnote 32 In these examples, Swiss law is as a result used to fill gaps in the regulationsFootnote 33 or to interpret them.Footnote 34 In addition, to support the importance of Swiss law, CAS jurisprudence stated that “[w]hen the rules and regulations of FIFA are to be applied primarily and Swiss law complementarily, there is no place for the application of the rules of another national law […]”.Footnote 35
Swiss law has a predominant significance before the CAS since Swiss law applies frequently in a subsidiary manner.Footnote 36 Besides, Swiss law is applicable even when the dispute has no relation with Switzerland, whenever parties cannot agree on applicable law.Footnote 37
Application of Chapter 12 PILA and R58 CAS Code 2023 enables a uniform application of the law and allows equality between athletes regardless of their domicile.Footnote 38 For example, every gap in FIFA’s regulations or interpretation of a rule refers to Swiss law in the same way for every football player across the world.Footnote 39 The same rules will be applied in the same way by CAS, regardless of the nationality of the parties.Footnote 40 If two parties could choose their national jurisdiction to settle a dispute, the same sports regulations would probably be applied and interpreted in a different way by every national jurisdiction regarding every specificities of their legislation.Footnote 41 The aim of a consistent and egalitarian international sport system would not be conceivable with such discrepancies.
2.4.3 Before Swiss courts
In accordance with Article 75 SCC, all final decisions of an association under Swiss law can be challenged before a judge. If the Statutes of the IF do not contain any arbitral clause in favour of CAS, decisions of this organisation may be challenged before Swiss cantonal courts. Some IFs have explicit provisions related to the competence of these ordinary courts, in particular FEIFootnote 42 and FIDE.Footnote 43 In a different way, IOC has a very limited arbitration clause that implies a broad residual competence for ordinary courts.Footnote 44 For all cases before Swiss civil courts, the judges will apply Swiss law.Footnote 45
3 Which rules and principles of Swiss law apply in the context of international sport?
3.1 Swiss association law
The association is the Swiss legal entity with the broadest freedom,Footnote 46 due to a large degree of autonomy.Footnote 47 Basically, the associations have a freedom of constitution, a freedom of decision and a freedom of organisation.Footnote 48 However, there is one main economic constraint imposed on associations: having an ideal purpose.Footnote 49 So IFs cannot distribute their profits and must re-invest them in the pursuit of the association’s ideal purpose(s).Footnote 50
According to Article 63(2) SCC, “[m]andatory provisions of law cannot be altered by the articles of association”. In other words, association’s autonomy is limited by mandatory provisions of law.Footnote 51 If an associative rule (statutes or any other regulations) violates mandatory law, this rule is unlawful and cannot be applied.Footnote 52 If there is a lack of information in the association’s rule on a specific issue, the dispositive law shall apply.Footnote 53 In any other cases, association’s rules and regulations are applicable.Footnote 54
Also, all rules enacted by sports organisations may not derogate from the mandatory rules of the Swiss Civil Code orthe general principles of law (i.e., legality, equal treatment, prohibition of discrimination and proportionality),Footnote 55 be contrary to good morals or public policy, unlawfully affect the personality of its membersFootnote 56 or violate competition law.Footnote 57 If a rule violates these various limitations, it is null and void.Footnote 58
3.2 Swiss contract law’s general principles
CAS’ Panels often apply general principles of Swiss contract law in contractual disputes. The rule regarding the interpretation of contracts is one of the most important. Article 18(1) Federal Act on the Amendment of the Swiss Civil Code (The Code of Obligations, “SCO”) states that “the true and common intention of the parties must be ascertained without dwelling on any inexact expressions or designations they may have used either in error or by way of disguising the true nature of the agreement”. The common intention of the parties must prevail on the literal wording of a clause.Footnote 59 When the common intention cannot be established, the interpretation must be made according to the requirements of good faith (principle of trust and confidence): “the judging body has to seek to determine how a declaration or an external manifestation by a party could have been reasonably understood depending on the individual circumstances of the case”.Footnote 60
CAS applies other principles of Swiss law, in particular when the applicable sports regulations do not contain any provisions regarding specific issues: the nullity of a contract can be pronounced if an obligation is impossible or immoral (Article 20 SCO);Footnote 61 the penalty clauses can be reduced by the judge in particular circumstances if penalties are excessive (Article 163(3) SCO);Footnote 62 in employment contracts, a duty to mitigate the damage (Article 337c(2) SCO) is imposed on the employee (i.e., a coach or a player) unjustifiably fired (i.e., by searching new opportunities to work elsewhere).Footnote 63
In addition, some regulations are inspired by Swiss contract law. Article 17(1) of the FIFA FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (“RSTP”) 2022 regarding the consequences of terminating a contract without just cause (breach of contract) closely follows the system of Swiss labour law (Article 337b and 337c SCO) as noted by some CAS’ Panels.Footnote 64 In relation to labour law, a CAS Panel applied Swiss contract law (Article 319 SCO) because the FIFA regulations “do not provide a set of rules governing the conclusion of an employment agreement”.Footnote 65 Moreover, the FIFA RSTP itself is, as noted by Haas, “based on a normatively shaped preconception, which derives from having a look at Swiss law”.Footnote 66 This author lists the situations in which the Panels must refer to Swiss law in connection with the FIFA RSTP: the determination of a “just cause”, the calculation of the damage under Article 17(1) FIFA RSTP 2022 and the potential reduction of this damage.Footnote 67
Besides, the CAS Panel in Valcke’s award stated that “applicable Swiss law is merely intended to clarify that the FIFA regulations are based on a normatively shaped basis, deriving from Swiss law, and that any matter that is not covered by FIFA regulations must be decided in accordance with Swiss law” and “[c]onsequently, the purpose of the reference to Swiss law […] is to ensure the uniform interpretation of the standards of the football industry worldwide”.Footnote 68
As FIFA RSTP is based under Swiss law and this latter is applicable subsidiarily, almost all the relations between footballers, coaches and clubs are, in a way, “shaped” by Swiss law principles.
3.3 Swiss international private law
The seat of each Arbitration Panel for all CAS’ proceedings, pursuant to R28 CAS Code 2023, is in Switzerland, even ad hoc Division(s) which take place outside Switzerland during the Olympic Games.Footnote 69 As a result, Swiss international private law is applicable regarding Article 176(1) PILA.Footnote 70 The provisions primarily at hand within the framework of PILA are of procedural nature. After providing a brief overview of arbitrability and provisional measures, our focus will be on the grounds for appeals against CAS awards. These rules of law pertain to the merits of the disputed award. It is important to note that while various other provisions of PILA may be applicable, they are not the central topic of the present article and will not be treated.
3.3.1 Arbitrability of the dispute
According to Article 177(1) PILA, “[a]ny claim involving an economic interest may be submitted to arbitration”. The notion of arbitrability in Swiss international private law is wide. For example, disputes related to labour law are arbitrable.Footnote 71 Since Article 177 PILA is applicable for every disputes before CAS, the concept of arbitrability of the national countries of athletes, clubs or sport’s governing bodies plays has no influence.Footnote 72 So Swiss law (PILA) ensures that all competitors around the world can bring the same type of disputes before CAS, in an equal way and irrespective of their nationality.
3.3.2 Provisional measures
Swiss arbitration law allows, contrary to other national law, the granting of provisional measures by the arbitral tribunal in view of Article 183(1) PILA.Footnote 73 Before CAS, R37 CAS Code 2023 provides for the CAS’ Panels jurisdiction in relation to provisional measures. Three elements are considered: 1) the necessity to protect the applicant from irreparable harm, 2) the likelihood of success based on the merits and 3) whether the interests of the Applicant outweigh those of the Respondent(s).Footnote 74 This gives every athlete irrespective of their domicile the possibility to ask for provisional measures before CAS without state courts’ intervention.Footnote 75 The access to provisional measures, fundamental to guarantee the efficient running of sports competitions, is thus accessible to all to guarantee equal treatment. Besides, at least theoretically, no athlete can obtain an advantage through national provisional measures decision due to supportive state courts.Footnote 76
3.3.3 Grounds for appeals against CAS awards – the substantive public policy
One of the particularities of the Swiss judicial system that makes it popular for international arbitration is that there is no double degree of jurisdiction.Footnote 77 The only appeal authority that can set aside a CAS award is the SSC.Footnote 78 As pointed out by Casini, the SSC is the closing gate of all the system.Footnote 79 In addition, the chances of success are very low,Footnote 80 for instance 10% in sporting matters.Footnote 81 Again, this allows an equal treatment between parties to CAS’ arbitrations,Footnote 82 because no one is more (or less) protected by his/her/its national jurisdiction. Below, we will only analyse the substantive public policy as a ground to annul a CAS award (Article 190(2) PILA), because the other grounds are formal and are not specific to sporting issues. The substantive public policy of Article 190(2)(e) PILA is an autonomous concept.Footnote 83 It is the only ground to challenge an award on its merits.Footnote 84 As a result, the athletes can only assert all their rights before CAS.Footnote 85
An award can be set aside, regarding the substantive public policy, “if it disregards those essential and broadly recognised values which, according to the prevailing values in Switzerland, should be the founding stones of any legal order”.Footnote 86 The award must not only violates the substantive public policy in its reasons, but in the result of the decision.Footnote 87 This concept is interpreted in a very narrow way by the SSC.Footnote 88 This ground is more restrictive than the arbitrariness, which can only be claimed in internal arbitration before the SSC.Footnote 89
The original function of Article 190(2)(e) PILA is to provide a minimum quality of international arbitral award.Footnote 90 It ensures that no protection is offered to situations that violate the most essential principles of the legal system in a shocking way.Footnote 91
The following rules and principles are included in the substantive public policy: the principles of good faith and abuse use of rights,Footnote 92pacta sunt servanda,Footnote 93ne bis in idemFootnote 94 and res judicata,Footnote 95 the protection against serious violation of personality rightsFootnote 96 and the protection of human dignityFootnote 97 and against discriminatory measures.Footnote 98 In sport, an award also violates the substantive public policy if it is manifestly or grossly unfairFootnote 99 or grossly disproportioned.Footnote 100
On the contrary, the following grounds are not part of the substantive public policy of Article 190(2)(e): a violation of the Swiss ConstitutionFootnote 101 or the European Convention on Human Rights (“ECHR”),Footnote 102 an incorrect application of mandatory law,Footnote 103 a simple conflict between the contested award and the various norms of Swiss law,Footnote 104 a violation of EU competition law,Footnote 105 a simple contradiction in the award,Footnote 106 an inconsistency of the ruling of an award,Footnote 107 a manifestly erroneous finding of fact,Footnote 108 a manifestly incorrect assessment of evidence,Footnote 109 an obvious wrong establishment of the facts,Footnote 110 the Panel ignoring a regulationFootnote 111 or the principle of strict liability in doping.Footnote 112 Most importantly, the interpretation of statutes and regulations and its legal consequences cannot be challenged.Footnote 113 The SSC has left open the question of whether the principles of non-retroactivity, lex mitior and the prohibition of reformation in pejus are part of the substantive public policy.Footnote 114
3.4 Swiss interpretation of sports regulations’ method
Frequently, the Tribunal must interpret sports regulations to make a decision. According to the SSC’s jurisprudence, for the statutes of major sporting organisations such as UEFA, FIFA or the IAAF (currently World Athletics), the method of interpretation of the law must be used.Footnote 115 The same is applicable to determine the exact meaning of other sports regulations.Footnote 116
In a recent decision regarding the interpretation of FIFA regulations in the Cardiff City FC v FC Nantes case, the SSC made a detailed overview of this method of interpretation, i.e.,: “Any interpretation begins with the letter of the law (literal interpretation), but this is not decisive: we still have to find the true scope of the norm, which also derives from its relationship with other legal provisions and its context (systematic interpretation), the aim pursued, particularly the protected interest (teleological interpretation), as well as the will of the legislator as it may be understood from the ”travaux préparatoires” (historical interpretation). The judge departs from a clear legal text only when the aforementioned methods of interpretation show that this text does not correspond in all respects to the true meaning of the provision in question and leads to results which the legislator could not have wanted, which conflict with the sense of justice or the principle of equal treatment. In short, the Federal Tribunal does not favor any method of interpretation and does not establish a hierarchy, based on a pragmatic pluralism to seek the true meaning of the norm”.Footnote 117
CAS jurisprudence refers to SSC’s and apply the above method to interpret sports regulations.Footnote 118 Lately, the CAS Panel in Sport Lisboa e Benfica SAD v FIFA case interpreted Article 18bis RSTP with this same method of interpretation.Footnote 119
As a result, before CAS Panel and the SSC, the Swiss method of interpretation of the law is used to interpret sports regulations. It particularly important because interpretation of sports regulation(s) is often a major issue in sporting disputes. Here again, it is the principles of Swiss law that have an utmost influence on the final decision.
4 Protection of legal personality as the core principle of sports law
4.1 Introduction
The protection of legal personality has a fundamental role for professional athletesFootnote 120 and is effective against everyone.Footnote 121 The legal personality (Articles 27 and 28 SCC) acts as a limit to the autonomy of Swiss associations,Footnote 122 such as most of the IFs.Footnote 123 Therefore, and as repeatedly stated by the SSC, the rules and decisions of association cannot breach the legal personality of athletes (or clubs and national federations).Footnote 124
As pointed out by Kaufmann-Kohler and Rigozzi, the civil law concept of legal personality is comparable to the common law equivalent of human rights applied between private entities.Footnote 125 There is a strong spiritual connection and common goal between these two concepts.Footnote 126 For example, the right to respect private and family life (Article 8(1) ECHR) includes the civil law protection of physical integrity, respect for the private life and honour of every person.Footnote 127 The ECHR has also an influence over the legal personality when the latter is interpreted in relation to the case law of the European Court of Human Rights (“ECtHR”).Footnote 128 The way these two concepts operate is quite similar: a violation of the legal personality or human rights is not per se unlawful but needs to be justified by supporting grounds. However, the main difference is that human rights are applicable between private and public entities while the rights attached to legal personality in Swiss law are only applied between private persons.
4.2 Protection of legal personality against excessive restriction (Article 27(2) SCC)
According to Article 27(2) SCC, “[n]o person may surrender his or her freedom or restrict the use of it to a degree which violates the law or public morals”. Therefore, the parties to a contractual relationship cannot dispose of their freedom in a manner contrary to morality.Footnote 129 This legal basis is comparable to the American legal concept of “unconscionability”,Footnote 130 or the English law concept of “inequality of bargaining power”. Basically, this Article leads to a limit in the contractual freedom by prohibiting any excessive self-commitment.Footnote 131 The excessive nature of the restriction depends on several factors, such as the intensity or the duration of the commitment.Footnote 132 If the commitment is found to be excessive, it will be considered null and void.Footnote 133
As mentioned in the Matuzalem case before the SSC, the limits to legal commitments due to the protection of privacy do not apply only to contractual agreements but also to the statutes and decisions of legal persons.Footnote 134 Thus, and as mentioned in Valcke’s award, the autonomy of the IFs formed as a Swiss association is not absolute and is in particular limited by Article 27(2) SCC.Footnote 135 Basically, any rule of an IF that is excessive, unusual or too vague may violates Article 27(2) SCC. This is particularly true because, given the monopolistic position of the IFs, the athletes have no real choice to agree to the statutes and rules of these associations to participate in sporting competitions. Their consent is not totally free.Footnote 136
4.3 Protection of legal personality against infringements (Article 28 SCC)
4.3.1 Introduction
Following Article 28(1) SCC, “[a]ny person whose personality rights are unlawfully infringed may petition the court for protection against all those causing the infringement”. Therefore, every person has the right to go to court against the person who participates in the infringement of their personality rights (droits de la personnalité).Footnote 137 The protection of Article 28 SCC is only available for relations under private law.Footnote 138 Private persons and legal entities can use this article to protect their personality rights.Footnote 139 Athletes, clubs and sporting organisations, such as national federations, are protected by this legal concept.Footnote 140 For athletes, it is a very powerful way to protect their rights against statutes, rules and decisions of IFs.Footnote 141
4.3.2 Athletes’ personality rights
Case law and legal authors mentioned the main rights of the professional athletes, for example the right to good health and bodily integrity’s protection (i.e., infringed by an antidoping blood test), the right to protect their honour (i.e., infringed by a decision of suspension for doping) and the right to the economic development and the fulfilment through the sport (i.e., infringed by the refusal of a licence/transfer or a suspension).Footnote 142 In addition, an important right is the possibility to take part in sporting competitions of an appropriate level, which is consistent with the level of the athlete.Footnote 143 In a correlated way, Schmid points out the essential right to participate and win with fair and equal means,Footnote 144 in other words, the right to a level playing field between the contestants.Footnote 145 In sport, Baddeley categorises the different rights of the athletes in four groups: the physical integrity, the fulfilment by the sporting activity, the professional freedom and the respect for private life.Footnote 146
As mentioned above, all these rights can be affected by rules or decisions of the sporting organisation, especially disciplinary sanctions, which can infringe the honour, the private life and the professional and economic freedoms.Footnote 147 The economic rights can also be affected by a suspension which can lead to a diminution of the salary, bonuses and sponsoring revenues of the athletes.Footnote 148
In summary, every athlete across the world, regardless of their nationality, is protected against unlawful infringement of his/her personality rights if he/she is a direct or an indirect member of an IF incorporated as an association under Swiss law.
4.3.3 Justifying reasons for the violation of personality rights
According to Article 28(2) SCC, “[a]n infringement is unlawful unless it is justified by the consent of the person whose rights are infringed or by an overriding private or public interest or by law”. In these cases, the victim will have to live with the harm suffered.Footnote 149 Thus, the effect of the justifying reasons is to exclude the unlawfulness of the infringement (and to make it lawful).Footnote 150
The term “law” described in this Article refers to specific state law and does not include the regulations of an association.Footnote 151 In Switzerland, no law is relevant in the context of sport (except Article 21(1) of the Swiss Federal Act on the Promotion of Sport and Exercise of 17 June 2011, in relation to doping controls) and no law allows sporting organisations to impose sanctions.Footnote 152
Regarding the consent of the athletes, the specific system and organisation of international sport must be addressed. Following the famous Cañas case before the SSC, professional sport is characterized by a highly hierarchical structure.Footnote 153 The SSC precises that in most cases, an athlete does not really have a free choice over his/her federation. He/she will have no choice but to accept the rules if he/she wants to participate in sporting competitions.Footnote 154 As a result, and regarding the participation in sporting competition, the consent is not real and free because of this subordinate position. The voluntary participation of athletes in competitive sport could be perceived as a consent to certain limitations of their personality rights. However, the extent of this consent and the complete submission to regulations, including references to additional regulations, may be regarded as excessive in view of Article 27(2) SCC.Footnote 155
The essential analysis in relation to personality rights in sport is the potential public or private interest which could override the private interest of the victim of the infringement.Footnote 156 This interest may justify the infringement of the personality rights.Footnote 157
The public interest is an interest that provides a benefit to the society or to a plurality of people.Footnote 158 The fight against doping is probably the most obvious example of a public interest. In the Old Cat case, the SSC stated that doping regulations are justified by the protection of a level playing field and the loyalty of competitions, the protection of the health of the contestants and the formative function of sport.Footnote 159 The ECtHR also recognized the public interest of antidoping regulations in relation to health, fair play and level playing field in sport.Footnote 160 Some authors points out other public interests such as the protection against prohibited and dangerous substances,Footnote 161 the protection of the other athletes,Footnote 162 the reputation of sport for young people,Footnote 163 and the pedagogical virtues of sport.Footnote 164
Some private interests developed in case law can be mentioned, such as the interest for an IF to avoid the proliferation of National Olympic Committees located on the territory of non-recognized States,Footnote 165 or the interest to avoid nation shopping or mercenaries by sporting nationality rules.Footnote 166 The private interest can also be in relation to the victim of the infringement, for example his/her health protection by antidoping rulesFootnote 167 or by the categorisation in fighting sports like boxing.Footnote 168 Moreover, rules can be enacted to protect the reputation and the credibility of the sport with the public and sponsors.Footnote 169
When a public or private interest is identified, the judge or the Panel must make a balance between the interests involved, namely, on the one hand, the victim’s interest in not being harmed and, on the other hand, the offender’s interest to achieve its objective.Footnote 170 More concretely, the interest of the sporting organisation to sanction an athlete must override the interest of the athlete to not be affected in his/her personality rights.Footnote 171
The principle of proportionality is very important in Swiss law.Footnote 172 The SSC has on several occasions stated that proportionality must be observed by the organisation which imposes a sanction.Footnote 173 Thus, an evidently and grossly disproportionate decision must be overturned.Footnote 174 In CAS jurisprudence, it is recognised that the principle of proportionality must be applied to disciplinary sanctions decided by associations under Swiss law.Footnote 175 In competitive sport, Article 28 SCC can be used to challenge disproportionate disciplinary sanctions.Footnote 176 A decision must be appropriate and necessary to reach the objectives of the sporting organisation.Footnote 177
4.4 Consequences of an infringement of personality rights
If a sporting regulation violates unlawfully the protection of personality rights, it will be declared null and void.Footnote 178 The same is true for every rule which infringes Article 27(2) SCC regarding excessive restriction of the legal personality.Footnote 179 Similarly, every decision of an IF which infringes the legal personality will also be declared null and void.Footnote 180 The compatibility of the sporting regulations with the legal framework can normally be reviewed before CAS, as in the Semenya case.Footnote 181
4.5 Protection of legal personality as part of the substantive public policy before the Swiss Supreme Court
4.5.1 Swiss Supreme Court case law
CAS awards can be challenged before the SSC in view of Articles 190 PILA and 77 of the Federal Supreme Court Act. The only ground to contest a decision on the merits is the incompatibility with the substantive public policy of Article 190(2)(e) PILA.Footnote 182
According to the SSC, Article 27(2) SCC related to the protection of legal personality against excessive commitments is included in the concept of substantive public policy of Article 190(2)(e) PILA.Footnote 183 However, a violation of this Article is not automatically contrary to the substantive public policy and it is necessary to be confronted to an obvious and severe case of fundamental right’sFootnote 184/legal personality’s violation.Footnote 185 A commitment is excessive regarding Article 27(2) SCC if it exposes a party to the arbitrariness of his contracting partner, deprives him of his economic freedom or limits it to such an extent that the basis of his economic existence is endangered.Footnote 186 Basically, and in relation to disciplinary sanctions, a CAS award may be set aside if it leads to a manifestly unfair result or a shocking iniquity.Footnote 187
Discriminatory measures that unlawfully infringes the legal personality (because taken solely on the grounds of sex, race, state of health, sexual orientation, religion, nationality or political opinion) may violate the substantive public policy.Footnote 188 The principle of prohibition of discrimination has been invoked several times recently, but the SSC interpreted it in a very narrow way.Footnote 189 More importantly, and following the order of the SSC in the Semenya case, the SSC stated, firstly, that it is doubtful that the restrictive notion of public policy comprises discriminatory measures when it is a private relationship (i.e., between an IF and an athlete).Footnote 190 Then, in its final decision, it leaves open this issue by pointing out that the CAS award in this case does not establish any discrimination that is contrary to substantive public policy.Footnote 191 The ECtHR in the Semenya case recently held that Switzerland, through the SSC, has a duty to prevent and remedy discriminatory practices, even if they arise from private persons or entities.Footnote 192
In addition and according to the SSC’s case law, a violation of the Swiss ConstitutionFootnote 193 or the ECHRFootnote 194 is not a ground to challenge a CAS award. Nevertheless, it can be pointed out that certain human rights guaranteed by the ECHR are part of the public policy, along with the protection of human dignity.Footnote 195 Moreover, the protection of Article 27(2) SCC is an implementation of the constitutional right of personal freedomFootnote 196 and is very close to Article 8 ECHR related to the right to respect for private and family life.Footnote 197
In 2012, the SSC admitted an appeal made by Francelino da Silva Matuzalem (a Brazilian football player) against a CAS award.Footnote 198 The Matuzalem case is special and important because it is the first and, for the moment, the last decision of the SSC, which has set aside an award relating to international arbitration for violation of substantive public policy (in this case, a severe violation of Article 27(2) SCC).Footnote 199 Basically, this decision stated that the goal of FIFA to enforce the principle that contracts must be kept (pacta sunt seranda) is much less important, on the balance of interests, than a potential indefinite and unlimited professional ban of a player from his/her sport.Footnote 200 In other cases, the SSC stated that the following CAS awards are not contrary to the substantive public policy in relation to Article 27(2) SCC: a two-year suspension of a football player for doping,Footnote 201 a five-year ban of a football player for match-fixing,Footnote 202 the Valcke’s ten-year ban from all football-related activities in relation to its role in issues related to FIFA administrationFootnote 203 or the life ban from any kind of football-related activity of the former president of the Brazilian football federation.Footnote 204
4.5.2 Observations
It appears that the possibilities to set aside a CAS award before the SSC based on the merits is almost impossible.Footnote 205 Thus, some authors suggest broadening the concept of the substantive public policy of Article 190(2)(e) PILA,Footnote 206 to improve the guarantee of minimum standards of quality of CAS awards.Footnote 207
The substantive public policy should be interpreted differently depending on the area.Footnote 208 In the Cañas case, the SSC have accepted to approach the international sports arbitration in a different way in relation to the renunciation of appeal before the SSC.Footnote 209 So, the SSC could apply the same reasoning to widen the concept of the substantive public policy for international sports arbitration.Footnote 210 This would lead to a better protection of the legal personality or the essential rights of athletes and clubs,Footnote 211 and set aside potential grossly unfair CAS decisions.Footnote 212 Unfortunately, the SSC recently stated, again, that even though the particularities of sports arbitration have been considered in relation to specific procedural issues like the renunciation of appeal, it does not want to create a genuine lex sportiva by its case law,Footnote 213 instead of the CAS whose role it is.
Another important point could be to consider a specific sporting public policy (“ordre public sportif”), which could include, for example, the fundamental principles of fair-play or level playing field between competitors,Footnote 214 and would necessitate a protection, even before the SSC.
A wider control of CAS awards based on the merits could encourage CAS Panels to be more rigorous.Footnote 215 Indeed, these Panels, for now, know that their awards will only be set aside on the merits if they violate the substantive public policy of Article 190(2)(e) PILA, which is a very unlikely possibility. A more extensive control (more than just illusory),Footnote 216 could improve the quality of CAS awards and protect in a better way the athletes.
In the recent Semenya case, the ECtHR held that although limited power of review by the SSC could be justified in commercial arbitration, where the parties are on an equal footing, it raises more concerns in sports arbitration.Footnote 217 The SSC’s decision, limited to an analysis of substantive public policy, was considered in this case as a violation of the right to an effective remedy (Article 13 in relation to Article 14 combined with Article 8 ECHR).Footnote 218 In particular, the ECtHR stated that, due to the very restrictive ground of substantive public policy, the SSC did not effectively address the allegations of discrimination, which must be analyzed between private entities, too.Footnote 219 If this decision is not overturned by a possible decision of the Grand Chamber (Article 43 ECHR), it should lead to some difficulties for appeals against CAS decisions to be reviewed by the SSC. Either the SSC will have to interpret its concept of substantive public policy in a broader manner to incorporate more efficiently (directly or indirectly) certain rights provided by the ECHR (for example principles deriving from Article 8 ECHR), or this more extensive power will have to emerge from a legislative modification.Footnote 220
5 Conclusions
It clearly appears that Swiss law is of a fundamental importance in the context of international sport. Firstly, by the fact that many IFs have their seat in Switzerland and are submitted to Swiss association law. Secondly, because Swiss law is often chosen as the law applicable to contracts, even when no parties are Swiss. Thirdly, Swiss law is to a large extent the law applicable subsidiarily to disputes, significant to interpret regulations or fill gaps in them. Fourthly, Swiss law may also be an inspiration for sports regulations, such as the FIFA RSTP (from Swiss labour law) or the CAS Code (from Chapter 12 PILA). Fifthly, because Swiss private international law is applicable for every CAS’ procedure as the lex arbitri (i.e., regarding questions of arbitrability, provisional measures and law applicable to the disputes or grounds for appeal against CAS awards).
As a conclusion, what appears from this article is that the impact of Swiss law in international sport has a wide positive effect to protect the equal treatment between athletes and the level playing field in competitions. The lex arbitri (Chapter 12 PILA) provides this through a uniform and sports-friendly procedural regime. Moreover, the law applicable to the dispute can be the sports regulations (regarding Article 187 PILA), a non-state law, which permit to offer an equal treatment before CAS irrespective of the country and legal system of each of the competitors. Thus, CAS can fulfil its important aim to apply the same rules in the same way to guarantee a level playing field for everybody around the world. Besides, Swiss law, as a subsidiarily law, is often applied to interpret and fulfil loopholes in sporting regulations. The law applicable will always be the same for everybody involved in the same competition in a specific sport. The grounds to appeal CAS awards are the same for all, irrespective of their country, too.
As a result, Swiss law as a whole and by its particularities, allows that the same rules apply in the same way and every party in sport has the same rights, with the essential aim of equal treatment. As stated by the ECtHR in the Mutu/Pechstein case, “[r]ecourse to a single and specialised international arbitral tribunal facilitates a certain procedural uniformity and strengthens legal certainty; all the more so where the awards of that tribunal may be appealed against before the supreme court of a single country, in this case the Swiss Federal Court, whose ruling is final”.Footnote 221
Swiss law is certainly not the perfect tool. Its application in sport might be improved, for example, in relation to the restrictive notion of substantive public policy before the SSC. However, the advantages of this system and its influence to guarantee equal treatment and a level playing field in international sport are essential. Swiss law allows a broad flexibility that lets the world of sport regulate itself while, at the same time, providing safeguards to protect athletes from the monopoly power of sports organisations. Swiss law is, as a conclusion, a flexible tool to guarantee predictability and legal security, which allows an equal treatment and level playing field in the world of sport.
Notes
Art 4 FEI Statutes 2021; art 1.1 and 2 FIBA General Statutes 2021; art 1.1 FIDE Statutes 2020; preamble and art 1.3 FIE Statutes 2022; art 1(1) FIFA Statutes 2022; art 1.1 and 1.2 FIG Statutes 2023; art 1.1 FIH Statutes 2021; art 4(1) FIM Statutes and By-Laws 2022; art 3.1 and 3.2 FIS Statutes 2022; art 1.2 World Rowing Statutes 2021; art 1.2.2 FIVB Constitution 2022; Art 2.1 and 2.2 IBA Constitution 2022; art 2.1 IBSF Statutes 2022; art 2.1.10 IGF Constitution 2018; art 1(1) IHF Statutes 2022; art 2.2 IIHF Statutes 2021; art 1(6) ISU Constitution 2022; art 1.1.5.1 ITTF Constitution 2022; art 1.2 IWF Constitution 2021; art 1(2) UCI Constitution 2021; art 1 UWW Constitution 2014; art 1.2 and 3.1 WCF Constitution 2022; art 1.2 World Archery Constitution 2022; art 2.1 and 2.2 World Aquatics Constitution 2023; art 2 WBF Statutes 2018; art 1.1 WBSC Statutes 2021; Preamble of World Triathlon Constitution 2023.
Rule 15(1) IOC Olympic Charter 2021.
Art 3.1 ANOC Constitution 2022; art 4.1 ARISF Statutes 2021; art 1.1 and 1.3 ASOIF Statutes 2022.
Art 1 WADA Statutes 2021. In relation to the foundation under Swiss law, see in particular Merkt (2021).
Art. 33 FIS Agreement Ski World Cup; art 8 IHF Standard Contract for Competitions.
See also S1 CAS Code 2023.
“The provisions of this Chapter apply to arbitral tribunals that have their seat in Switzerland if, at the time that the arbitration agreement was concluded, at least one of the parties thereto did not have its domicile, its habitual residence or its seat in Switzerland” [art 176(1) PILA].
Art 178 PILA.
Art 179, 180, 183, 184 and 185 PILA.
Art 187 PILA.
Art 191 PILA.
On the content of these grounds, see pp. 9 ff.
Art 63(3) World Rowing Statutes 2021.
Art 38.3 FEI Statutes 2021.
Art 39.1 and 39.2 FEI Statutes 2021; art 40 FIBA General Statutes 2021; art 13.1 FIDE Statutes 2020; art. 7.2.7 FIE Statutes 2022; art 57(1) FIFA Statutes 2022; art 33 FIG Statutes 2023; art 5(1) FIM Statutes and By-Laws 2022; art 30.6 and 31.1 World Aquatics Constitution 2023; art 16.1, 16.6.2 and 16.7 FIS Statutes 2022; art 65 and 66 World Rowing Statutes 2021; art 2.7.5 FIVB Constitution 2022; art 49.2 IBA Constitution 2022; art 18.3 IBSF Statutes 2022; art 47 ICF Statutes 2021; art 23 IHF Statutes 2022; art 22 IIHF Statutes 2021; rule 61 IOC Olympic Charter 2021; art 26(1) and 26(2) ISU Constitution 2022; art 1.8.3.1 ITTF Constitution 2022; art 43.1 IWF Constitution 2021; art 72 and 73 UCI Constitution 2021; art 61(1) and 62(1) UEFA Statutes 2021; art 1.31 World Archery Constitution 2022; art 42 WBF Statutes 2018; art 21.3 WBSC Statutes 2021; art 18.1 WCF Constitution 2022; art 52.1 and 52.2 World Triathlon 2023.
Art 30.1(g) BWF Constitution 2021; art 29.1 IJF Statutes 2020; art 25 ISSF Constitution 2019; art XIII WFDF Bylaws 2021; art. 84.3 World Athletics Constitution 2021.
Valloni and Pachmann (2018, p. 125).
Valloni and Pachmann (2018, p. 126).
Haas (2015, p. 8).
Kaufmann-Kohler and Rigozzi (2015, pp. 351 ff).
On Article 187 PILA, see in particular Dutoit and Bonomi (2022, pp. 1028 ff).
Rigozzi (2013, pp. 309 and 317).
Rigozzi (2013, p. 317).
See for example CAS 2018/A/5808 AC Milan v UEFA, award of 1 October 2018, para 126.
Haas (2015), p. 12 and references mentioned.
Art 56(2) FIFA Statutes 2022; art 49.3 IBA Constitution 2022; art 23 IHF Statutes 2022; art 22.2 IIHF Statutes 2021.
Mavromati and Reeb (2015, p. 552).
CAS 2016/A/4709 SASP Le Sporting Club de Bastia v. Christian Koffi N’Dri Romaric, award of 16 March 2017, para 104 and reference mentioned.
Mavromati (2018, p. 33) and references mentioned.
Haas (2015, pp. 15 ff).
Maisonneuve (2011, pp. 205 ff).
Maisonneuve (2011, pp. 205 ff).
Art 38.2 FEI Statutes 2021: “Civil actions against the FEI shall be brought before the courts of competent jurisdiction in Lausanne, Switzerland, subject to the matters which shall be referred to arbitration under the Statutes”.
Art 13.5 FIDE Statutes 2020: “The ordinary courts in Lausanne, Switzerland shall have exclusive jurisdiction to resolve any dispute between FIDE and third parties, including but not limited to member federations or any of their officials, players, organisers, arbiters, FIDE officials, candidates to any function as FIDE officials within the meaning of Article 3.1 of the Statutes, or affiliated organisations, in respect of a matter arising out of or in connection with the FIDE Statutes, Regulations and Rules, or agreements between FIDE and these persons and/or entities”.
Rule 61.1 Olympic Charter 2021: “The decisions of the IOC are final. Any dispute relating to their application or interpretation may be resolved solely by the IOC Executive Board and, in certain cases, by arbitration before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS)”. Rule 61,2 Olympic Charter 2022: “Any dispute arising on the occasion of, or in connection with, the Olympic Games shall be submitted exclusively to the Court of Arbitration for Sport, in accordance with the Code of Sports-Related Arbitration”.
PILA to determine the law applicable to the merits if it is an international case, Swiss association law (art. 60 ff SCC) as the legal framework of the sporting organisation, Swiss Civil Procedure Code (CPC) and other general principles of Swiss law.
Baddeley (1994, p. 25).
Meier (2021, pp. 628 ff).
ATF 97 II 108 (1971), para 2; ATF 134 III 193 (2006), para 4.3.
Perrin and Chappuis (2008, p. 40).
Perrin and Chappuis (2008, p. 38).
Guillod (2018, pp. 315 ff).
Federal Act on Cartels and other Restraints of Competition of 6 October 1995 (CartA) (LCart). Valloni and Pachmann (2018, p. 97).
Steiner (2010, p. 46).
CAS 2017/A/5183 Elaziğspor Kulübü v Fabio Alves da Silva, award of 1 March 2018, paras 83 ff.
CAS 2009/A/1991 Kuwait Sporting Club v FC Flora Tallinn & FIFA, award of 14 June 2010, para 18 and references mentioned; ATF 144 III 93 (2018), para 5.2.1-5.2.3 and references mentioned. See also CAS 2005/A/896 Fulham FC (1987) Ltd. v FC Metz, award of 16 January 2006, paras 22 ff and references mentioned; CAS 2007/A/1351 SC FC Unirea 2006 SA v Nenad Pavlovic, award of 8 July 2008 paras 10 ff and references mentioned.
CAS 2013/A/3383-3385 Volga Nizhniy Novgorod v Levan Silagadze, award of 13 November 2014, paras 55 ff.
CAS 2015/A/4139 Al Nassr Saudi Club v Trabzonspor FC, award of 20 January 2016, paras 48 ff. See also CAS 2004/A/780 Christian Maicon Henning v Prudentópolis SC & Prudentópolis SC v Christian Maicon Henning & Eintracht Frankfurt Fußball AG, award of 18 July 2005, para 37.
CAS 2015/A/4206 Hapoel Beer Sheva FC v Ibrahim Abdul Razak & CAS 2015/A/4209 Ibrahim Abdul Razak v Hapoel Beer Sheva FC, award of 29 July 2016, paras 235 ff.
CAS 2013/A/3398 FC Petrolul Ploiesti v Aleksandar Stojmirovic, award of 23 June 2014, para 67; CAS 2015/A/4220 Club Samsunspor v Aminu Umar & FIFA, award of 12 July 2016, para 76; CAS 2015/A/4122 Al Shaab FC v Aymard Guirie, award of 26 August 2016, para 81; CAS 2015/A/4217 Zamalek FC v Ricardo Alves Fernandes, award of 20 September 2016, para 93.
CAS 2006/A/1024 F.C. Metallurg Donetsk v Lerinc, award of 31 January 2007, para 31 ff.
Haas (2015, p. 15).
Haas (2015, p. 15).
CAS 2017/A/5003 Jérôme Valcke v FIFA, award of 27 July 2018, para 147.
Kaufmann-Kohler and Rigozzi (2015, p. 62).
Article 176(1) PILA: “The provisions of this Chapter apply to arbitral tribunals that have their seat in Switzerland […]”. If the arbitration involves only Swiss parties, CPC applies (Articles 353 ff CPC) and not PILA.
Rigozzi (2012, p. 446 and 450).
Rigozzi (2013, p. 315).
R37 para 5 CAS Code 2023.
Rigozzi (2013, p. 315).
Rigozzi 92012, p. 450).
Besson (2018, p. 103).
Art 191 PILA.
Casini (2012, p. 165).
Besson (2018, p. 104).
Besson (2018, p. 104). The only award set aside in relation to substantive public policy is the Matuzalem case (ATF 138 III 322 (2012).
Rigozzi (2012, p. 453).
Bucher (2011), Article 190 LDIP, p. 1696.
Arroyo (2018), Article 190 PILS, p. 321.
Rigozzi (2010), p. 265.
ATF 132 III 389 (2006), para 2.2.3 (the English translation of this decision is available here: (https://www.swissarbitrationdecisions.com/sites/default/files/8%20mars%202006%204P%20278%202005.pdf); Supreme Court decision 4A_318/2018 of 4 March 2019, para 4.3.1; Supreme Court decisions 4A_248/2019 and 4A_398/2019 of 25 August 2020, para 9.1.
Rigozzi (2012, pp. 455 ff).
ATF 138 III 322 (2012), para 4.3.2 and references mentioned; Supreme Court decisions 4A_248/2019 and 4A_398/2019 of 25 August 2020, para 9.1.
Corboz (2002, p. 25).
Supreme Court decision 4A_318/2018 of 4 March 2019, para 4.3.1.
Supreme Court decision 4A_318/2018 of 4 March 2019, para 4.3.1 and references mentioned.
ATF 147 III 49 (2020), para 9.4 and references mentioned; Supreme Court decision 4A_318/2018 of 4 March 2019, para 4.3.1; Bovey 2022, Article 77 LTF, p. 957.
Supreme Court decision 5A_805/2014 of 22 June 2015, para 5.2 and references mentioned; Supreme Court decision 4A_318/2018 of 4 March 2019, para 4.5.2; Supreme Court decision 4A_542/2021 of 28 February 2022, para 6.3.2.
Lindholm (2019, pp. 193 and 202).
Supreme Court decision 4A_32/2016 of 20 December 2016, para 4.3 and references mentioned.
Supreme Court decision 4A_362/2013 of 27 March 2014, para 3.2.2 and references mentioned; Supreme Court decisions 4A_548/2019 and 4A_550/2019 of 29 April 2020, para 7.3.
ATF 128 III 191 (2002), para 6b), Bucher (2011), Article 190 LDIP, p. 1707.
Arroyo (2018), Article 190 PILS, pp. 332 ff.
Supreme Court decision 4A_668/2016 of 24 July 2017, para 4.2.
Arroyo (2018), Article 190 PILS, p. 338.
Supreme Court decision 4A_314/2017 of 28 May 2018, para 2.3.1 (an English translation is available at this web address: https://www.swissarbitrationdecisions.com/sites/default/files/28%20mai%202018%204A%20314%202017.pdf); Supreme Court decision 4A_420/2022 of 30 March 2023, para 5.5.5.1.
Supreme Court decision 4A_314/2017 of 28 May 2018, para 2.3.1 (an English translation is available at this web address: https://www.swissarbitrationdecisions.com/sites/default/files/28%20mai%202018%204A%20314%202017.pdf); Supreme Court decision 4A_420/2022 of 30 March 2023, para 5.5.5.1.
Supreme Court decision 4A_314/2017 of 28 May 2018, para 2.3.1 (wording from the English translation available here: https://www.swissarbitrationdecisions.com/sites/default/files/28%20mai%202018%204A%20314%202017.pdf); Supreme Court decision 4A_420/2022 of 30 March 2023, para 5.5.5.2. See also CAS 2018/A/5881 Abdelmalek Mokdad v Mouloudia Club d’Alger & Fédération Algérienne de Football, award of 9 April 2019, para 70.
See for example CAS 2016/A/4903 Club Atlético Vélez Sarsfield v. The Football Association Ltd., Manchester City FC & FIFA, award of 16 April 2018, para 90 references mentioned and CAS 2018/A/5957 Galatasaray v UEFA, award of 15 February 2019, paras 81 and 82 and references mentioned.
CAS 2020/A/7008 Sport Lisboa e Benfica SAD v FIFA, award of 10 May 2021, paras 61 ff.
CAS 2013/A/3091 FC Nantes v FIFA & Al Nasr Sports Club & CAS 2013/A/3092 Ismaël Bangoura v Al Nasr Sports Club & FIFA & CAS 2013/A/3093 Al Nasr Sports Club v. Ismaël Bangoura & FC Nantes, award of 2 July 2013, para 224 and references mentioned.
Bucher (2009, p. 105).
ATF 134 III 193 (2006), para 4.3 and references mentioned; Supreme Court decision 5A_805/2014 of 22 June 2015, para 5.1; Supreme Court decision 5A_982/2015 of 9 December 2016, para 5.1.
See above p. 2 ff.
ATF 134 III 193 (2006), para 4.3 and references mentioned; Supreme Court decision 5A_21/2011 of 10 February 2012, para 5.2.1; Supreme Court decision 5A_982/2015 of 9 December 2016, para 5.1.
Kaufmann-Kohler and Rigozzi (2015, p. 503).
Rouvinez (2011, p. 7).
Braconi et al. (2020, p. 36). See also Semenya v Switzerland App no 10934/21 (ECtHR, 11 July 2023) opinion of Judge Serghides para. 10.
Rouvinez (2011, p. 7).
ATF 102 II 211 (1976), para 6.
Maisonneuve (2011, p. 309).
CAS 2015/A/4042 Gabriel Fernando Atz v PFC Chernomorets Burgas, award of 23 December 2015, para 68; CAS/A/5056 Ittihad FC v James Troisi & FIFA & CAS 2017/A/5069 James Troisi v Ittihad FC, award of 23 November 2017, para 70.
For a summary of these different factors, see in particular Marchand (2010), Article 27 CC, pp. 232 ff.
Perrin and Chappuis (2008, p. 41).
ATF 138 III 322 (2012), para 4.3.3. On the Matuzalem case in relation to substantive public policy, see pp. 18 ff.
CAS 2017/A/5003 Jérôme Valcke v FIFA, award of 27 July 2018, para 157.
Aebi-Müller and Morand (2012, p. 238). On the question of the consent of the athletes, see the Cañas case (ATF 133 III 235 (2007)).
ATF 134 III 193 (2006), para 4.5; Supreme Court decision 5A_21/2011 of 10 February 2012, para 5.1; Supreme Court decision 4A_314/2017 of 28 May 2018, para. 2.3.2.1.
Braconi et al. (2020, p. 38) and references mentioned.
Schmid (2002, p. 128).
ATF 134 III 193 (2006), para 4.5; Supreme Court decision 5A_21/2011 of 10 February 2012, para 5.2. See also Baddeley (1996, p. 171), Schmid (2002, p. 129). On the freedom to an economic activity in sport, see also Tribunal cantonal du canton du Valais, Cour civile II, Swiss Football League ASF, FIFA et Transfer Matching System GmbH contre Stefan Glarner et al., provisional measures, decision of 16 November 2011, para 5a)aa); CAS 2013/A/3091 FC Nantes v FIFA & Al Nasr Sports Club & CAS 2013/A/3092 Ismaël Bangoura v Al Nasr Sports Club & FIFA & CAS 2013/A/3093 Al Nasr Sports Club v. Ismaël Bangoura & FC Nantes, award of 2 July 2013, para 224; TAS 2012/A/2720 FC Italia Nyon v LA de l’ASF & ASF & FC Crans, award of 11 April 2014, para 10.24; CAS 2016/A/4560 Al Arabi SC Kuwait v Papa Khalifa Sankaré & Asteras Tripolis FC, award of 25 April 2017, para 95; CAS 2017/A/5092 Club Hajer FC Al-Hasa v Arsid Kruja, award of 16 April 2018, para 128; CAS 2020/A/6950 Football Club FCSB v Lukasz Gikiewicz, award of 7 June 2021, para 153.
Tribunal cantonal du canton du Valais, Cour civile II, Swiss Football League ASF, FIFA et Transfer Matching System GmbH contre Stefan Glarner et al., provisional measures, decision of 16 November 2011, para 5a)aa); CAS 2013/A/3091 FC Nantes v FIFA & Al Nasr Sports Club & CAS 2013/A/3092 Ismaël Bangoura v Al Nasr Sports Club & FIFA & CAS 2013/A/3093 Al Nasr Sports Club v. Ismaël Bangoura & FC Nantes, award of 2 July 2013, para 224; TAS 2012/A/2720 FC Italia Nyon v LA de l’ASF & ASF & FC Crans, award of 11 April 2014, paras 10.23 ff; Baddeley (1996, p. 182); TAS 2018/A/5634 Munir El Haddadi & Fédération Royale Marocaine de Football v FIFA & Real Federación Española de Fútbol, award of 13 August 2018, para 73; TAS 2020/A/7444 Munir El Haddadi & Fédération Royale Marocaine de Football v FIFA & Real Federación Española de Fútbol, award of 18 January 2021, para 111; Baddeley (1998, pp. 21 ff), Schmid (2002, p. 1309).
Schmid (2002, pp. 129 ff).
On the right to a level playing field between sporting competitors and equality of opportunity, see Perruchoud (2020).
Baddeley (1996, pp. 171 ff).
ATF 134 III 193 (2006), para 4.5; Supreme Court decision 5A_805/2014 of 22 June 2015, para 5.1; Supreme Court decision 5A_982/2015 of 9 December 2016, para 5.1 and references mentioned.
ATF 134 III 193 (2006), para 4.5; CAS 2013/A/3091 FC Nantes v FIFA & Al Nasr Sports Club & CAS 2013/A/3092 Ismaël Bangoura v Al Nasr Sports Club & FIFA & CAS 2013/A/3093 Al Nasr Sports Club v. Ismaël Bangoura & FC Nantes, award of 2 July 2013, para 224.
Jeandin (2010), Article 28 CC, p. 261.
Baddeley (2008, p. 711).
Baddeley (2008, p. 711).
ATF 133 III 235 (2007), para 4.3.2.2.
ATF 133 III 235 (2007), para 4.3.2.2.
ATF 134 III 193 (2006), para 4.6.3.2.2.
National Federation of Sportspersons’ Associations and Unions (FNASS) and Others v France App nos 48151/11 and 77769/13 (ECtHR, 18 January 2018), paras 164 ff. On the justifying reason of the level playing field, see also ATF 134 III 193 (2006), para 4.6.3.2.2; Supreme Court decision 5A_982/2015 of 9 December 2016, para 6.2; Schmid (2002, pp. 138 ff), Perruchoud (2020, pp. 370 ff).
Baddeley (2008, p. 712).
Manaï (2008, p. 162).
FF 1992 II 1321 Message concernant la Convention du Conseil de l’Europe contre le dopage du 12 février 1992, 1328. See also Supreme Court decision 5A_982/2015 of 9 December 2016, para 6.2. Several CAS Panels stated that there is a public interest to publish and expose the bad behaviour and corruption of officials in sport (CAS 2011/A/2426 Amos Adamu v FIFA, 24 February 2012, para 101; CAS 2011/A/2425 Ahongalu Fusimalohi v FIFA, award of 8 March 2012, para 57; TAS 2011/A/2433 Amadou Diakite v FIFA, award of 8 March 2012, para 60).
Supreme Court decision 5A_21/2011 of 10 February 2012, paras 5.3 and 5.5.3.
CAS 2007/A/1377 Melanie Rinaldi v FINA, award of 26 November 2007, para 55.
Flueckiger 2008, p. 176.
Schmid (2002, p. 137).
ATF 134 III 193 (2006), para 4.6.2; Supreme Court decision 5A_805/2014 of 22 June 2015, para 5.2; Supreme Court decision 5A_982/2015 of 9 December 2016, para 5.2; TAS 2012/A/2720 FC Italia Nyon v LA de l’ASF & ASF & FC Crans, award of 11 April 2014, para 10.47. The same reasoning appeared when the ECtHR examined a potential violation of human rights in the Semenya case. The Court balanced the interests of IAAF to organise faire competition and those of the athlete to protect her dignity and physical integrity (Semenya v Switzerland App no 10934/21 (ECtHR, 11 July 2023) para 186).
Valloni and Pachmann (2018, p. 55).
Supreme Court decision 5A_805/2014 of 22 June 2015, para 5.3; Supreme Court decision 5A_982/2015 of 9 December 2016, paras 5.3 and 6.2.
Lindholm (2019, p. 202) and references mentioned.
“[…] the severity of a sanction must be proportionate to the offence committed. To be proportionate, the sanction must not exceed that which is reasonably required in the search of the justifiable aim.” (CAS 2013/A/3297 Public Joint-Stock Company “Football Club Metalist” v UEFA & PAOK FC, award of 29 November 2013,
para 8.26). See also TAS 2007/O/1381 Real Federación Española de Ciclismo (RFEC) & Alejandro Valverde
v UCI, award of 26 September 2007, para 61; CAS 2019/A/6636 BC Arsenal v Russian Basketball Federation, award of 3 August 2020, para 161.
Meier (2021, p. 363).
Valloni and Pachmann (2018, p. 55).
Perrin and Chappuis (2008, p. 41).
Bucher (2009, p. 83).
Foëx (2010), Article 75 CC, p. 544. See also TAS 2012/A/2720 FC Italia Nyon v LA de l’ASF & ASF & FC Crans, award of 11 April 2014, para 10.46.
CAS 2018/O/5794 Mokgadi Caster Semenya v IAAF & CAS 2018/O/5798 Athletics South Africa v IAAF, award of 30 April 2019.
See pp. 9 ff.
Supreme Court decision 4P.12/2000 of 14 June 2000, para 5b/aa and references mentioned; Supreme Court decision 4A_116/2016 of 13 December 2016, para 4.2.3; Supreme Court decision 4A_32/2016 of 20 December 2016, para 4.1; Supreme Court decision 4A_668/2016 of 24 July 2017, para 4.2; Supreme Court decision 4A_312/2017 of 27 November 2017, para 3.1; ATF 144 III 120 (2018), para 5.4.2; Supreme Court decision 4A_318/2018 of 4 March 2019, para 4.3.1; Supreme Court decision 4A_486/2022 of 26 April 2023, para. 7.1.
Supreme Court decision 4A_458/2009 of 10 June 2010, para 4.4.3.2; Supreme Court decision 4A_116/2016 of 13 December 2016, para 4.2.3; Supreme Court decision 4A_668/2016 of 24 July 2017, para 4.2 and references mentioned; Supreme Court decision 4A_312/2017 of 27 November 2017, para 3.1 and references mentioned; ATF 144 III 120 (2018), para 5.4.2; Supreme Court decision 4A_318/2018 of 4 March 2019, para 4.3.1; Supreme Court decision 4A_486/2022 of 26 April 2023, para. 7.1.
Supreme Court decision 4A_318/2018 of 4 March 2019, para 4.5.2 and references mentioned.
Supreme Court decision 4P.12/2000 of 14 June 2000, para 5; Supreme Court decision 4A_370/2007 of 21 February 2008, para 5.4; Supreme Court decisions 4A_248/2019 and 4A_398/2019 of 25 August 2020, para 9.4 and 9.5; Supreme Court decision 4A_618/2020 of 2 June 2021, para. 5.3.1.
Supreme Court order 4A_248/2019 of 29 July 2019, para 3.1. See also Supreme Court decision 4A_618/2020 of 2 June 2021, para 5.3.1.
ATF 147 III 49 (2020), para 9.4 and references mentioned. See also Supreme Court decision 4A_618/2020 of 2 June 2021, para 5.3.1 (case related to the overall competitive advantage resulting from an athlete's use of prostheses).
Semenya v Switzerland App no 10934/21 (ECtHR, 11 July 2023) paras 192 ff.
Rietiker (2013, p. 275).
ATF 138 III 322 (2012). An English translation is available at this web address:
http://www.swissarbitrationdecisions.com/sites/default/files/27%20mars%202012%204A%20558%202011.pdf.
Supreme Court decision 4A_522/2012 of 21 March 2013, para 4.2.2.
Supreme Court decision 4A_362/2013 of 27 March 2014, para 3.4; Supreme Court decision 4A_448/2013 of 27 March 2014, para 3.4.
Supreme Court decision 4A_540/2018 of 7 May 2019, para 4.
Supreme Court decision 4A_542/2021 of du 28 February 2022, para 6.
Kaufmann-Kohler and Rigozzi (2015, p. 50)6.
Kaufmann-Kohler and Rigozzi (2015, pp. 506 ff).
Rigozzi (2013, p. 323).
ATF 133 III 235 (2007).
Rigozzi (2012, pp. 459 ff).
Supreme Court decision 4A_312/2017 of 27 November 2017, para 3.3.2. See also Supreme Court decision 4A_116/2016 of 13 December 2016, para 4.2.3; ATF 147 III 49 (2020), para 9.8.3.3.
Rigozzi (2005, p. 743).
Poudret and Besson (2002, p. 816).
Semenya v Switzerland App no 10934/21 (ECtHR, 11 July 2023) para 177.
Semenya v Switzerland App no 10934/21 (ECtHR, 11 July 2023) paras 235 and 240.
Semenya v Switzerland App no 10934/21 (ECtHR, 11 July 2023) paras 192 ff, 235 and 239.
Judge Pavli’s concurring opinion seems to indicate that the judgment is not intended to criticise Swiss legislation and lead to legislative reform in Switzerland (Semenya v Switzerland App no 10934/21 (ECtHR, 11 July 2023) opinion of Judge Pavli para. 12).
Mutu and Pechstein v Switzerland App nos 40575/10 and 67474/10 (ECtHR, 2 October 2018) para 98. See also Semenya v Switzerland App no 10934/21 (ECtHR, 11 July 2023) para 111.
Abbreviations
- ANOC:
-
Association of the National Olympic Committees [ANOC Constitution 2022]
- ARISF:
-
Association of IOC Recognised International Sports Federations [ARISF Statutes 2021]
- ASOIF:
-
Association of Summer Olympic International Federations [ASOIF Statutes 2022]
- ATF:
-
Recueil officiel des arrêts du Tribunal fédéral suisse (Official collection of judgments of the Swiss Supreme Court)
- BWF:
-
Badminton World Federation [BWF Constitution 2021]
- CAS (TAS):
-
Court of Arbitration for Sport (Tribunal Arbitral du Sport) [CAS Code 2023]
- CPC:
-
Swiss Civil Procedure Code of 19 December 2008
- ECHR:
-
European Convention on Human Rights 1950
- ECtHR:
-
European Court of Human Rights
- FEI:
-
International Federation for Equestrian Sports [FEI Statutes 2021]
- FF:
-
Feuille fédérale [FF 1992 II 1321 Message concernant la Convention du Conseil de l’Europe contre le dopage du 12 février 1992]
- FIBA:
-
International Basketball Federation [FIBA General Statutes 2021]
- FIDE:
-
Fédération Internationale des Échecs (International Chess Federation) [FIDE Statutes 2020]
- FIE:
-
Fédération International d’Escrime (International Fencing Federation) [FIE Statutes 2022]
- FIFA:
-
Fédération Internationale de Football Association [FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (RSTP) 2022; FIFA Statutes 2022]
- FIG:
-
Fédération Internationale de Gymnastique (International Gymnastics Federation) [FIG Statutes 2023]
- FIH:
-
International Hockey Federation [FIH Statutes 2021]
- FIM:
-
Fédération Internationale de Motocyclisme [FIM Statutes and By-Laws 2022]
- FIS:
-
Fédération Internationale de Ski (International Ski Federation) [FIS Agreement Ski World Cup; FIS Statutes 2022]
- FIVB:
-
Fédération Internationale de Volleyball (International Volleyball Federation) [FIVB Constitution 2022]
- IAAF:
-
International Association of Athletics Federations
- IBA:
-
International Boxing Association [IBA Constitution 2022]
- IBSF:
-
International Bobsleigh and Skeleton Federation [IBSF Statutes 2022]
- ICF:
-
International Canoe Federation [ICF Statutes 2021]
- IF(s):
-
International federation(s)
- IGF:
-
International Golf Federation [IGF Constitution 2018]
- IHF:
-
International Handball Federation [IHF Standard Contract for Competitions, IHF Statutes 2022]
- IIHF:
-
International Ice Hockey Federation [IIHF Statutes 2021]
- IJF:
-
International Judo Federation [IJF Statutes 2020]
- IOC:
-
International Olympic Committee [IOC Host City Contract 2024 Paris; IOC Olympic Charter 2021]
- ISSF:
-
International Shooting Sport Federation [ISSF Constitution 2019]
- ISU:
-
International Skating Union [ISU Constitution 2022]
- ITTF:
-
International Table Tennis Federation [ITTF Constitution 2022]
- IWF:
-
International Weightlifting Federation [IWF Constitution 2021]
- PILA / PILS:
-
Swiss Federal Act on Private International Law of 18 December 1987
- SCC:
-
Swiss Civil Code of 10 December 1907
- SCO:
-
Federal Act on the Amendment of the Swiss Civil Code (The Code of Obligations)
- SSC:
-
Swiss Supreme Court (Swiss Federal Tribunal, SFT)
- UCI:
-
Union Cycliste Internationale (International Cycling Union) [UCI Constitution 2021]
- UEFA:
-
Union of European Football Associations [UEFA Statutes 2021]
- UWW:
-
United World Wrestling [UWW Constitution 2014]
- WADA:
-
World Anti-Doping Agency [WADA Statutes 2021; WADA World Anti-Doping Code 2021]
- WBF:
-
World Bridge Federation [WBF Statutes 2018]
- WBSC:
-
World Baseball Softball Confederation [WBSC Statutes 2021]
- WCF:
-
World Curling Federation [WCF Constitution 2022]
- WFDF:
-
World Flying Disc Federation [WFDF Bylaws 2021[
- World Archery:
-
World Archery Constitution 2022
- World Aquatics:
-
World Aquatics Constitution 2023
- World Athletics:
-
World Athletics Constitution 2021
- World Rowing:
-
World Rowing Statutes 2021
- World Triathlon:
-
World Triathlon Constitution 2023
References
Aebi-Müller R, Morand A-S (2012) Die persönlichkeitsrechtlichen Kernfragen der “Causa FC Sion”. Causa Sport 3: 234–249. https://www.walderwyss.com/user_assets/publications/Die-persoenlichkeitsrechtlichen-Kernfragen-der-Causa-FC-Sion.pdf. Accessed 28 Mar 2023
Arroyo M (2018) ad 190 PILS. In: Arroyo M (ed) Arbitration in Switzerland: the practitioner’s guide: volume I, 2nd edn. Wolters Kluwer, Berlin, pp 266–350
Baddeley M (1993) L’autonomie de l’association sportive en droit suisse. In: Dallèves L, Baddeley M (eds) Chapitres choisis du droit du sport. Médecine et hygiène, pp 33–49
Baddeley M (1994) L’association sportive face au droit : les limites de son autonomie, Helbing & Lichtenhahn 1994. https://archive-ouverte.unige.ch/unige:16546/ATTACHMENT01. Accessed 28 Mar 2023
Baddeley M (1996) Le sportif, sujet ou objet ? : la protection de la personnalité du sportif. Revue De Droit Suisse 115(2):136–252
Baddeley M (1998) The Protection of the Personal Rights of Athletes: Concept, Application and Function of such a Protection in Swiss Civil Law. Sport Law J 6(1):19–30
Baddeley M (2007) La décision Cañas : nouvelles règles du jeu pour l’arbitrage international du sport. Causa Sport 2:155–163
Baddeley M (2008) Droits de la personnalité et arbitrage : le dilemme des sanctions sportives. In: Gauch P, Werro F, Pichonnaz P (eds), Mélanges en l’honneur de Pierre Tercier, Schulthess, pp 707-725. https://archive-ouverte.unige.ch/unige:17094/ATTACHMENT01. Accessed 28 Mar 2023
Berger B, Kellerhals F (2021) International and domestic arbitration in Switzerland, 4th edn. Stämpfli
Besson S (2018) Le recours contre la sentence en droit suisse. Revue De L’arbitrage 1:99–120
Bovet G (2022) ad Article 77 LTF. In: Aubry Girardin F, Donzallaz Y, Denys C, Bovey G, Frésard J-M (eds) Commentaire de la LTF, 3rd edn. Stämpfli, pp 03–979
Braconi A, Carron B, Gauron-Carlin S (eds) (2020) Code civil suisse et code des obligations annotés, 11th edn. Helbing & Lichtenhahn
Bucher A (2009) Personnes physiques et protection de la personnalité, 5th edn. Helbing & Lichtenhahn
Bucher A (2011) ad Article 190 LDIP. In: Bucher A (ed) Loi sur le droit international privé : Convention de Lugano. Helbing & Lichtenhahn, pp 1669–1715
Burckhardt P, Meier R (2018) ad Article 187 PILS. In: Arroyo M (ed) Arbitration in Switzerland: the practitioner’s guide: volume II, 2nd edn. Wolters Kluwer, pp 212–232
Carrard F (2012) International sport federations and continental sport organizations: in search of a balance. In: Rigozzi A, Sprumont D, Hafner Y (eds) Citius, altius, fortius: mélanges en l’honneur de Denis Oswald. Helbing & Lichtenhahn, pp 15–25
Casini L (2012) The making of a “Lex sportiva” by the Court of Arbitration for Sport. In: Siekmann R, Soek J (eds) Lex sportiva: what is sports law? T.M.C. Asser Press, pp 149–172
Corboz B (2002) Le recours au Tribunal fédéral en matière d’arbitrage international. La Semaine Judiciaire I I(1):1–32
Dasser F, Wójtowicz P (2018) Challenges of Swiss arbitral awards: updated statistical data as of 2017. Bull ASA 36(2):276–294
Dudognon C (2014) The standard international sports federation: an association under Swiss law, with its headquarters in Lausanne. Sweet and Maxwell’s Int Sports Law Rev 14(2):50–56
Dutoit B (2016) Droit international privé suisse : Commentaire de la loi fédérale du 18 décembre 1987, 5th edn., Helbing & Lichtenhahn
Dutoit B, Bonomi A (2022) Droit international privé suisse : Commentaire de la loi fédérale du 18 décembre 1987, 6th edn., Helbing & Lichtenhahn
Flueckiger C (2008) Dopage, santé des sportifs professionnels et protection des données médicales, Schulthess. https://www.unine.ch/files/live/sites/cert/files/ouvrages/Flueckiger_these.pdf. Accessed 28 Mar 2023
Foëx B (2010) ad Article 75 CC. Foëx B, Pichonnaz P, Code civil I : commentaire (Art. 1–359 CC). Helbing & Lichtenhahn, pp 534–544
Garraffa P (2012) The “Matuzalem affaire”: ending of the sporting justice? Int Sports Law J 3–4:44–48
Guillod O (2018) Droit des personnes, 5th edn., Helbing & Lichtenhahn
Haas U (2009) Football disputes between players and clubs before the CAS. In: Bernasconi M, Rigozzi A (eds), Sport governance, football disputes, doping and CAS arbitration, 2nd CAS and FSA - SAV Conference, Weblaw, pp. 215-246
Haas U (2015) Applicable law in football-related disputes: the relationship between the CAS Code, the FIFA Statutes and the agreement of the parties on the application of national law. CAS Bulletin 2, 7-17. https://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Bulletin_2015_2_internet_.pdf. Accessed 28 Mar 2023
Jeandin N (2010) ad Article 28 CC. In: Foëx B, Pichonnaz P (eds) Code civil I: commentaire (Art. 1–359 CC). Helbing & Lichtenhahn, pp 243–266
Kaufmann-Kohler G, Rigozzi A (2015) International arbitration: law and practice in Switzerland. Oxford University Press
Levy R (2012) Swiss Federal Tribunal overrules CAS award in a landmark decision: FIFA vs Matuzalem. Int Sports Law J 3–4:35–38
Lindholm J (2019) The Court of Arbitration for Sport and its jurisprudence: an empirical Inquiry into Lex Sportiva. Asser Press, p 2019
Maisonneuve M (2011) L’arbitrage des litiges sportifs. L.G.D.J.
Manaï S (2008) Les attributs de la personnalité du sportif et leur commercialisation dans le contexte du contrat de sponsoring individuel : étude de droit privé suisse. Bis et Ter
Marchand S (2010) ad Article 27 CC. In: Foëx B, Pichonnaz P (eds) Code civil I : commentaire (Art. 1–359 CC). Helbing & Lichtenhahn, pp 229–243
Mavromati D (2018) Applicability of Swiss law in doping cases before the CAS and the Swiss Federal Tribunal. In: Duval A, Rigozzi A (eds) Yearbook of international sports arbitration 2016, T.M.C. Asser Press, pp 17–39
Mavromati D, Reeb M (2015) The Code of the Court of arbitration for sport: commentary, cases and materials. Wolters Kluwer
Meier P (2021) Droit des personnes : Personnes physiques et morales, art. 11–89a CC, 2nd edn. Schulthess
Meili A (2018) ad Article 28 ZGB. In: Geiser T, Fountoulakis C (eds) Zivilgesetzbuch I Basler Kommentar (Art. 1–456 ZGB), 6th edn. Helbing & Lichtenhahn, pp 284–306
Merkt B (2021) Droit des fondations d’utilité publique, 1st edn. Stämpfli Verlag AG
Morgan M (2013) The relevance of Swiss law in doping disputes, in particular from the perspective of personality rights: a view from abroad. Revue De Droit Suisse 132(3):341–351
Noth M, Haas U (2018a) ad R28 CAS Code. In: Arroyo M (ed) Arbitration in Switzerland: the practitioner’s guide: volume II, 2nd edn. Wolters Kluwer, pp 1445–1447
Noth M, Haas U (2018b) ad R45 CAS Code. In: Arroyo M (ed) Arbitration in Switzerland: the practitioner’s guide: volume II, 2nd edn. Wolters Kluwer, pp 1560–1563
Orelli M (2018) ad 177 PILS. In: Arroyo M (ed) Arbitration in Switzerland: the practitioner’s guide: volume I, 2nd edn. Wolters Kluwer, pp 61–70
Oswald D (2010) Associations, fondations, et autres formes de personnes morales au service du sport, P. Lang
Perrin J-F, Chappuis C (2008) Droit de l’association, 3rd edn. Schulthess. https://archive-ouverte.unige.ch/unige:10707/ATTACHMENT01. Accessed 28 Mar 2023
Perruchoud M (2020) Le droit à l’égalité des chances dans le sport. Helbing & Lichtenhahn
Poudret J-F, Besson S (2002) Droit comparé de l’arbitrage international. Schulthess
Rietiker D (2013) Introduire une requête en matière de sport à la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme : obstacles et perspectives, en particulier pour les parties aux procédures devant le Tribunal arbitral du sport (TAS). Revue De Droit Suisse 132(3):259–281
Rigozzi A (1997) Arbitrage, ordre public et droit communautaire de la concurrence : (ATF du 13 novembre 1998 et CJCE du 1er juin 1999, Benetton). Bulletin ASA 17(4):455–487
Rigozzi A (2005) L’arbitrage international en matière de sport. Helbing & Lichtenhahn
Rigozzi A (2010) Challenging awards of the Court of Arbitration for Sport. J Int Dispute Settl 1(1):217–265
Rigozzi A (2012) International sports arbitration: why does Swiss law matter? In: Rigozzi A, Sprumont D, Hafner Y (eds) Citius, altius, fortius: mélanges en l’honneur de Denis Oswald. Helbing & Lichtenhahn, pp 439–461
Rigozzi A, Hasler E (2018) ad R58 CAS Code. In: Arroyo M (ed) Arbitration in Switzerland: the practitioner’s guide, vol II, 2nd edn. Wolters Kluwer, pp 1677–1691
Rigozzi A (2013) L’importance du droit suisse de l’arbitrage dans la résolution des litiges sportifs internationaux. Revue de droit suisse 132(3) 301–325. https://lk-k.com/wp-content/uploads/RIGOZZI-Importance-du-droit-suisse-de-larb.-ds-r%C3%A9solution-litiges-sportifs-int-RDS-ZSR-2013-pp.-301-325.pdf. Accessed 28 Mar 2023
Rouvinez J (2011) La licence des droits de la personnalité : étude de droit privé suisse. Schulthess
Schmid J (2002) Persönlichkeitsrecht und Sport. In: Geiser T, Koller T, Reusser R, Walter HP, Wiegand W (eds) Privatrecht im Spannungsfeld zwischen gesellschaftlichem Wandel und ethischer Verantwortung. Stämpfli
Steinauer P-H, Fountoulakis C (2014) Droit des personnes physiques et de la protection de l’adulte. Stämpfli
Steiner M (2010) La soumission des athlètes aux sanctions sportives : étude d'une problématique négligée par le monde juridico-sportif, thèse Lausanne
Steingruber AM (2012) De facto unlimited prohibition to work as a football player as a violation of public policy. The International Sports Law Journal 3–4:39–44
Valloni L, Pachmann T (2018) Sports law in Switzerland, 3rd edn. Stämpfli
Zagklis A (2013) The relevance of Swiss law in sport corporate governance: a view from abroad. Revue De Droit Suisse 132(3):327–339
Zen-Ruffinen P (2002) Droit du sport. Schulthess
Funding
Open access funding provided by University of Applied Sciences and Arts Western Switzerland (HES-SO).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The author has no conflicts of interest to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
This article contains selected parts (edited and updated) of the never published LL.M. dissertation of the author submitted in 2019 (Nottingham Law School).
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Perruchoud, M. Application of Swiss law and influence of Swiss protection of legal personality in international sport: a necessity to ensure equality of treatment among competitors?. Int Sports Law J 23, 340–356 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40318-023-00251-8
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40318-023-00251-8