El papel del Tribunal de Arbitraje Deportivo en la gobernanza del deporte: tendencias jurídicas y desafíos futuros
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.6018/sportk.720181Palabras clave:
Tribunal De Arbitraje Deportivo (CAS), Arbitraje Deportivo, Gobernanza Del Deporte, Resolución De Disputas, Desafíos JurídicosResumen
El objetivo de este estudio fue examinar el papel del Tribunal de Arbitraje Deportivo (CAS) en la gobernanza del deporte, con un enfoque en las tendencias jurídicas y los desafíos futuros. El estudio adoptó un diseño de investigación cualitativo, doctrinal y descriptivo para analizar el papel del CAS en la gobernanza deportiva contemporánea. La investigación se centró en el análisis de la evolución, el marco jurídico, la jurisdicción y los desafíos emergentes del CAS como institución líder en la resolución de disputas deportivas internacionales. El CAS ha desempeñado un papel significativo en la resolución de disputas deportivas internacionales al proporcionar un mecanismo de arbitraje especializado que garantiza eficiencia, neutralidad y seguridad jurídica. Ha evolucionado hasta convertirse en un foro para la resolución de controversias relacionadas con el deporte, que van desde infracciones de dopaje y desacuerdos contractuales hasta cuestiones de gobernanza y disciplina. En la actualidad, las disputas deportivas han aumentado considerablemente debido a la comercialización del deporte, y el CAS enfrenta desafíos jurídicos cada vez más complejos en la resolución de este tipo de controversias. Sin embargo, el CAS también enfrenta importantes preocupaciones en relación con la independencia e imparcialidad de sus árbitros, ya que estos aspectos han sido cuestionados debido a afirmaciones de que el CAS tiende a favorecer a los organismos rectores del deporte frente a los atletas individuales. La eficacia futura del CAS dependerá de su capacidad para fortalecer la confianza de las partes interesadas mediante una mayor transparencia, el refuerzo de las garantías procesales, una accesibilidad más amplia y esfuerzos continuos para preservar su independencia institucional.
Descargas
Citas
1. Acries. (2021, March 21). Sports Arbitration: Certain Unique Features and the Court of Arbitration for Sport. Retrieved from https://www.acerislaw.com/sports-arbitration-certain-unique-features-and-the-court-of-arbitration-for-sport-the-cas/
2. Blackshaw, R. C. (2006). The Court Of Arbitration for Sport 1984–2004. TMC Asser Press.
3. CAS. (2013). History of CAS. Retrieved from https://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/templates/inside_1_col.html
4. CAS. (2023). Code of Sports-related Arbitration. Retrieved from R-28: https://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/CAS_Code_2023__EN_.pdf
5. CAS. (n.d.). What is the Court of Arbitration for Sport? Retrieved from https://www.tas-cas.org/en/general-information/frequently-%20asked-questions.html
6. Claudia Pechstein v. Court of Arbitration for Sport, 40575/10 and 67474/10) (European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). (2018).
7. Code of Sports-related Arbitration. (2023). Retrieved from https://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/CAS_Code_2023__EN_.pdf
8. Code: ICAS Statutes. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.tas-cas.org/en/icas/code-icas-statutes.html
9. Court of Arbitration for Sport. (2013). Fenerbahçe Spor Kulübü v. UEFA, CAS 2013/A/3256, arbitral award of 28 August 2013.
10. Court of Arbitration for Sport. (2016). Maria Sharapova v. International Tennis Federation, CAS 2016/A/4643 (Award of 30 September 2016). https://jurisprudence.tas-cas.org/
11. Forster, J. (2006). Global Sports Organizations and Their Governance. Corporate Governance, 6(1), 72-83.
12. Foster, K. (2016). Lex Sportiva and Lex Ludica: the Court of Arbitration for Sport’s Jurisprudence. Entertainment and Sports Law Journal, 3(2), 1-14.
13. Georgi Gradev, M. K. (2025, Feburary 10). Jurisdiction in CAS appeals: Why procedural compliance and naming the right party matters? Retrieved from https://www.lawinsport.com/topics/item/jurisdiction-in-cas-appeals-why-procedural-compliance-and-naming-the-right-party-matters
14. Goh, C. L., & Anderson, J. (2022). The credibility of the Court of Arbitration for Sport. Harvard Journal of Sports & Entertainment Law, 13(2), 233–264.
15. IOC. (n.d.). Court of Arbitration for Sports. Retrieved from https://www.olympics.com/ioc/cas
16. Kane, D. (2003). Twenty years on: An evaluation of the Court of Arbitration for Sport. In The Court of Arbitration for Sport 1984–2004 (pp. 611–634). Melbourne Journal of International Law.
17. Kane, D. (2003). Twenty years on: An evaluation of the Court of Arbitration for Sport. In The Court of Arbitration for Sport 1984–2004. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-6704-591-9_33
18. Kavanagh, T. (1999). The doping cases and the need for the International Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). University of New South Wales Law Journal, 22(3), 721–723. https://www.unswlawjournal.unsw.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/22-3-14.pdf
19. Kocasakal, H. Ö. (2020). The Impartiality and Independency of the Court of Arbitration for Sport within the Framework of ECRH Pechtein Ruling. Retrieved from https://iupress.istanbul.edu.tr/en/journal/ppil/article/avrupa-insan-haklari-mahkemesinin-pecshtein-karari-cercevesinde-casin-tarafsizligi-ve-bagimsizligi
20. LLC, A. L. (2021). Sports Arbitration: Certain Unique Features and the Court of Arbitration for Sport (the “CAS”). Retrieved from https://www.acerislaw.com/sports-arbitration-certain-unique-features-and-the-court-of-arbitration-for-sport-the-cas/
21. LOSC Lille v. Sporting Clube de Portugal & Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA); Sporting Clube de Portugal v. LOSC Lille, CAS 2023/A/9670 & CAS 2023/A/9671 (Court of Arbitration for Sport, 2023).
22. Matthieu Reeb. (2002). The Court of Arbitration for Sport: History and Operation . Retrieved from http://www.skilex.at/Obergurgl_Vortrag_Reeb_E.pdf
23. Mavromati, D., & Reeb, M. (2015). Introduction: The International Council of Arbitration for Sport (ICAS) and the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS): 30 years of history. In The code of the Court of Arbitration for Sport: Commentary, cases and materials (pp. 1–8). Kluwer Law International.
24. McLaren, R. H. (2001). Introducing the Court of Arbitration for Sport: The Ad Hoc Division at the Olympic Games. Marquette Sports Law Review, 12(1), 517-542.
25. McLaren, R. H. (2001). The Court of Arbitration for Sport: An independent arena for the world's sports disputes. Valparaiso University Law Review, 35(2), 379–398. https://scholar.valpo.edu/vulr/vol35/iss2/3
26. Mitten, M. J. (2014). The Court Of Arbitration for Sport and its Global Jurisprudence: International Legal Pluralism in a World without National Boundaries. Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution, 30(1), 1-12.
27. MS, A. (2012). The Evolution of Arbitration and its Consensual Nature in Consent in International Arbitration. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
28. Palermo, G. (2018). Independence of CAS vis-à-vis its Funders and Repeat Users of its Services. Retrieved from https://arbitrationblog.kluwerarbitration.com/2018/05/25/independence-cas-vis-vis-funders-repeat-users-services/
29. Perruchoud, M. (2023). Application of Swiss law and infuence of Swiss protection of legal personality in international sport: a necessity to ensure equality of treatment among competitors? The International Sports Law Journal, 23(2), 340–356.
30. Rigozzi, A. (2010). Challenging Awards of the Court of Arbitration for Sport. Journal of International Dispute Settlement, 1(1), 217-265.
31. Rigozzi, A., & Robert-Tissot, F. (2015). “Consent” in sports arbitration: Its multiple aspects. In E. Geisinger & E. Trabaldo de Mestral (Eds.), Sports arbitration as a coach for other players? (ASA Special Series No. 41, pp. 59–94). JurisNet LLC.
32. S29. (2023). Code of Sports-related Arbitration. Retrieved from https://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/CAS_Code_2023__EN_.pdf
33. Segesser, G. V. (2011). Swiss Federal Tribunal rejects multiple standards of independence and impartiality among arbitrators. Retrieved from https://arbitrationblog.kluwerarbitration.com/2011/01/25/swiss-federal-tribunal-rejects-multiple-standards-of-independence-and-impartiality-among-arbitrators/
34. SFT -Valverde v. Coni (WADA & UCI (4A_234 2010).
35. Steingruber, A. M. (2012). Consent in International Arbitration. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
36. Steingruber, A. M. (2012). The Evolution of Arbitration and Its Consensual Nature in Consent in International Arbitration. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
37. Swiss Federal Tribunal. (2012). Francelino da Silva Matuzalem v. Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA), 4A_558/2011 (Judgment of 27 March 2012). https://www.bger.ch
38. Trakman, L. (2007). The Impartiality and Independence of Arbitrators Reconsidered, International Arbitration Law Review, 10(4), 124, 127–128.
39. UNFA. (1958). United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (New York, 10 June 1958). Retrieved from Article 3: https://www.newyorkconvention.org/english
40. Williams, D. A. R., & Kawharu, A. (2011). Nature and sources of arbitration law. In Williams & Kawharu on arbitration (3rd ed., chap. 1). LexisNexis.
41. Willick, S. E., Miller, G. D., & Eichner, D. (2016). The Anti-Doping Movement. PM & R, 8, 125–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmrj.2015.12.001
42. World Anti-Doping Agency v. Sun Yang & Fédération Internationale de Natation. (2020). CAS 2019/A/6148 (Court of Arbitration for Sport, Award of 28 February 2020). https://jusmundi.com/en/document/decision/en-world-anti-doping-agency-wada-v-sun-yang-and-federation-internationale-de-natation-fina-arbitral-award-tuesday-22nd-june-2021-1
Descargas
Publicado
Cómo citar
Número
Sección
Licencia
Copyright © by the authors. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, meaning that anyone may download and read the paper for free. The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. These conditions allow for maximum use and exposure of the work, while ensuring that the authors receive proper credit.
