The role of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) in Lausanne as a forum for sports dispute resolution
https://doi.org/10.26907/2541-7738.2026.3.188-204
Abstract
This article examines the organization of sports dispute resolution in the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) and emphasizes that its mechanisms should be based on specific rules and procedures governing sports and recognize the authority of competition officials to make decisions during and after competitions. The CAS primarily functions as an adjudicatory tribunal with the power to not only “review” disputes, but also to “decide” them by issuing final and binding awards that apply common legal standards to particular cases in order to determine, modify, and (or) terminate the rights and obligations of the parties involved. The analysis of the history of the sports disputes resolved by the CAS shows that it promotes mediation as a preferred practice to settle disagreements. Because conflicts in sports emerge typically due to the intense emotions and psychological pressures that accompany sports events, the above approach seems to be justified. CAS mediators are qualified to “de-escalate” the emotional tension by helping the parties focus on objective facts. The development of alternative methods for resolving disputes with the creation of specialized “jurisdictional bodies” and “disciplinary committees” represents a good trend to improve the efficiency and accessibility of justice in sports.
About the Author
M. R. Asadullin
Ufa University of Science and Technology
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Murad R. Asadullin, Cand. Sci. (Law), Associate Professor, Department of Economic and Legal Security
Ufa
References
1. Vaskevich V.P. Some issues of law enforcement in disputes arising from professional activities of athletes. Herald of Civil Procedure, 2022, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 190–215. (In Russian)
2. Allouzi A.S. The legal system of mediation and conciliation centers in United Arab Emirates federal law “Under Federal Law No. 17 of 2016 and Its Amendment No. 5 of 2021”. Russian Law Journal, 2023, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 2808–2822.
3. Chua E. The future of international mediated settlement agreements: Of conventions, challenges and choices. Tan Pan Online: A Chinese-English Journal on Negotiation, 2015, pp. 1–11.
4. Belyaev S.A. Court of Arbitration for Sport in Lausanne: International legal issues of organization and activities. Moscow Journal of International Law, 2005, no. 3, рр. 213–233. https://doi.org/10.24833/0869-0049-2005-3-213-233. (In Russian)
5. Skvortsov O.Yu. Publicization of arbitration. Treteiskii Sud, 2021, no. 3/4, рр. 164–167. (In Russian)
6. Anurov V.N. Konflikt yurisdiktsii pri osparivanii arbitrazhnogo soglasheniya [Jurisdictional Conflicts in Challenging an Arbitration Agreements]. Moscow, Infotropic Media, 2013. 196 р. (In Russian)
7. Koshel A.B. State regulation and self-regulation in the field of professional sports. Journal of Russian Law, 2012, no. 6, рр. 112–118. (In Russian)
8. Demieva A.G. Judicial practice: Lawmaking or law enforcement? Vestnik Povolzhskogo Instituta Upravleniya imeni P.A. Stolypina, 2017, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 60–64. https://doi.org/10.22394/1682-2358-2017-2-60-64. (In Russian)
9. Golubtsov V.G. Court decision as a legal fact in civil law: Doctrinal discourse and the problem of legal formulations. Perm University Herald. Juridical Sciences, 2021, no. 52, рр. 240–262. (In Russian)
10. Bredikhin A.A. Decisions of the Court of Arbitration for Sport and the FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber viewed as precedents (labor disputes cases in the field of football). Mezhdunarodnoe Pravosudie, 2019, no. 3, рр. 59–68. https://doi.org/10.21128/2226-2059-2019-3-59-68. (In Russian)
11. Schaer M., Gaidaenko Schaer N.I., Zaitsev O.V. Compulsory execution of arbitration court decisions in Russia – a dangerous judicial precedent has been set. Herald of Civil Procedure, 2020, vol. 10, no. 5, рр. 101–117. https://doi.org/10.24031/2226-0781-2020-10-5-101-117. (In Russian)
12. Petrova K.V. Grounds for treating an arbitration agreement as incapable of being performed: Selected issues. Arbitrazhnyi i Grazhdanskii Protsess, 2023, no. 9, рр. 28–31. https://doi.org/10.18572/1812-383X-2023-9-28-31. (In Russian)
13. Vasiliev I.A. The balance of probabilities in anti-doping disputes: Establishing the source of a prohibited substance in an athlete’s sample. Arbitrazhnyi i Grazhdanskii Protsess, 2022, no. 4, рр. 16–19. https://doi.org/10.18572/1812-383X-2022-4-16-19. (In Russian)
14. Budylin S.L. Inner conviction or the balance of probabilities? The standards of proof in Russia and abroad. Vestnik Vysshego Arbitrazhnogo Suda Rossiiskoi Federatsii, 2014, no. 3, рр. 25–57. (In Russian)
15. Demesh V.P., Afonina A.D., Dudus A.N. Imperfections of WADA’s anti-doping legislation: Protected persons. Bulletin of Innovative Technologies, 2024, vol. 8, no. 1, рр. 60–63. (In Russian)
16. Soublière J., Hessert B. Safeguarding and beyond – the role of sports regulations, human rights and the balance between the rights of interested parties in sports investigations and the disciplinary proceedings that arise from them. CAS Bulletin, 2024, no. 1, рр. 6–32.
17. Leist O.E. Sanktsii i otvetstvennost’ po sovetskomu pravu: (teoreticheskie problemy) [Sanctions and Liability under Soviet Law: (Theoretical Problems)]. Moscow, MGU, 1981. 239 р. (In Russian)
18. Chebotarev A.V. Legal liability for violation of anti-doping rules in Russia: Problems and prospects. Law. Journal of the Higher School of Economics, 2019, no. 3, рр. 76–97. https://doi.org/10.17323/2072-8166.2019.3.76.97. (In Russian)
19. Girfanov I.I. The civil liability of physical culture and sports organizations. The Review of Economy, the Law and Sociology, 2025, no. 1, рр. 171–175. https://doi.org/10.24412/1998-5533-2025-1-171-175. (In Russian)
20. Demieva A.G., Savenko N.E. On the specific aspects of corporate liability. Juridical World, 2026, no. 5, рр. 27–30. https://doi.org/10.18572/1811-1475-2026-5-27-30. (In Russian)
21. Jourdain P. The principles of civil liability. Civil Law Review, 2021, vol. 21, no. 4, рр. 212–241. https://doi.org/10.24031/1992-2043-2021-21-4-212-241; no. 5, рр. 233–255. https://doi.org/10.24031/1992-2043-2021-21-5-233-255; no. 6, рр. 154–193. https://doi.org/10.24031/1992-2043-2021-21-6-154-193; 2022, no. 1, рр. 200–229. https://doi.org/10.24031/1992-2043-2022-22-1-200-229. (In Russian)
22. Vaskevich V.P. On contractual regulation in professional sports. Zakony Rossii: Opyt, Analiz, Praktika, 2009, no. 1, рр. 47–52. (In Russian)
23. Vasiliev I.A., Sheveleva N.A., Vetrova E.G. Banning a club from competitions for match fixing as an administrative measure established by UEFA: Legal nature and application. Zakon, 2020, no. 8, рр. 31–43. (In Russian)
24. Peshin N.L. On the status and jurisdiction of the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Lausanne. Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law, 2019, no. 5, рр. 125–139. https://doi.org/10.12737/jflcl.2019.5.8. (In Russian)
Review
For citations:
Asadullin M.R. The role of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) in Lausanne as a forum for sports dispute resolution. Kazan Journal of Historical, Linguistic, and Legal Research. 2026;168(3):188-204. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.26907/2541-7738.2026.3.188-204
Views:
38
JATS XML
Email this article 