Match Fixing

Chapter

Abstract

As far as the facts are concerned, it is clear that reference should be made to the full award. However, it is worth recalling here that the whole procedure conducted by the UEFA disciplinary bodies was concerned with whether or not FC Porto should be admitted to the UEFA Champions League for the 2008/09 season, bearing in mind the scandal and the criminal procedure known as “Apito Dourado”, in which FC Porto and its president were accused of involvement in referee corruption in 2004, i.e. several years previously. In the disputed decision, the UEFA Appeals Body had decided that it did not possess all the necessary evidence and referred the case back to the UEFA Control and Disciplinary Body (first instance). The clubs SL Benfica and Vitória SC challenged this decision before the CAS, requesting that FC Porto not be admitted to the UEFA Champions League 2008/09. Their interests clearly lay in the fact that Vitória SC had finished third in the Portuguese championship, while SL Benfica had finished fourth. If FC Porto were refused admission to the Champions League, Vitória SC would have qualified for the competition without having to play in the preliminary round, while SL Benfica would have gained a place in the Champions League preliminary round rather than in the UEFA Cup. The present article looks specifically at the question of the standing to appeal the UEFA decision. To conclude, a number of other issues dealt with in the arbitral award will be briefly mentioned.

References

  1. Baddeley M (1994) L’Association sportive face au droit. Helbing & Lichtenhahn, BaselGoogle Scholar
  2. Perrin JP (2004) Droit de l’association. Schulthess, ZurichGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© © T.M.C.ASSER PRESS, The Hague, The Netherlands, and the authors/editors  2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.LausanneSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations