| 0 | 0 | 7 |
| 下载次数 | 被引频次 | 阅读次数 |
国际体育仲裁院（CAS）在上诉仲裁案件中多次延期审理的行为被当事人指控违反了迅速原则，而被申请撤裁。瑞士联邦最高法院（SFT）分别从公共政策、平等原则和管辖权三方面驳回了当事人的撤裁申请，认定CAS的行为属于合理延迟。相关仲裁规则的指示性和宽容性使CAS的延期行为均能被解释为是规则所允许的，并被SFT“背书”。即使由欧洲人权法院审查SFT裁决，预计结果是瑞士不违反《欧洲人权公约》第6条要求缔约国保障合理期限的义务，即CAS没有违反人权法。然而，CAS行为的合法性无法消解运动员等当事人对“迟到非正义”的感知，由此形成了感知的非正义与实在法的正义之间的冲突。建议CAS、SFT、当事人、律师等相关方采取措施以消除对CAS行为合法性的质疑。
Abstract：There were some awards of the Court of Arbitration for Sport(CAS) challenged by the parties to be set aside for being incompatible with the principle of celerity because of multiple extensions of the time limit. The Swiss Federal Tribunal(SFT) dismissed the parties' application by examining public policy, the equality of the parties and jurisdiction, and decided that the delay to render a CAS award was reasonable. The indicative and tolerant nature of the relevant rules justified the delay of the CAS proceedings, which was "endorsed" by SFT. The European Court of Human Rights would probably rule that Switzerland had not violated the obligation of states parties to guarantee a reasonable time under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, in other words, the delay of CAS complied with the human rights law. However, it still could not alleviate the parties' sense of "late injustice", which was also established by relevant facts, and thus it triggered the conflict between the injustice perceived by the parties and the justice in positive law. In this regard, CAS, SFT, athletes and other parties, lawyers and other relevant parties may take some measures to prevent multiple extensions of the time limit before CAS being challenged.
[1]CAS. History of the CAS[EB/OL].[2024-04-12]. https://www.tas-cas.org/en/general-information/history-of-the-cas.html
[2]庞小菊.民事审判迅速化的效率原则[J].西部法学评论，2017(5):13-27
[3]郭晶.英美法系迅速审判权与欧陆法系诉讼及时原则之间的制度对话：比较法视野下的刑事诉讼“合理期间”[J].西安交通大学学报（社会科学版），2018,38(4):97-107
[4]SFT. 4A_22/2023[EB/OL].[2024-04-12]. https://www.bger.ch/ext/eurospider/live/fr/php/aza/http/index.php?highlight_docid=aza://16-05-2023-4A_22-2023&lang=fr&zoom=&type=show_document
[5]SFT. 4A_442/2023[EB/OL].[2024-04-12]. https://www.bger.ch/ext/eurospider/live/fr/php/aza/http/index.php?highlight_docid=aza://11-01-2024-4A_442-2023&lang=fr&zoom=type=show_document
[6]MAVROMATI D. Celerity of CAS proceedings and violation of procedural public policy[EB/OL].[2024-04-23]. https://www.sportlegis.com/2024/01/29/celerity-of-thecas-proceedings-and-violation-of-procedural-public-policy/
[7]CAS. CAS bulletin 2024/01[EB/OL].[2024-04-12]. https://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Bulletin_TAS_2024-1.pdf
[8]CAS. CAS 2021/A/8263 Russian Anti-Doping Agency v.Abdusalam Gadisov; CAS 2021/A/8381 World AntiDoping Agency v. Russian Anti-Doping Agency&Abdusalam Gadisov[EB/OL].[2024-04-12]. https://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/CAS_Award_8263___8381.pdf
[9]ARROYO M. Arbitration in Switzerland:The practitioner's guide[M]. Alphen aan den Rijn:Kluwer Law International,2013
[10]LEWIS A, TAYLOR J. Sport:Law and practice[M].London:Bloomsbury Professional,2021
[11]MAVROMATI D, REEB M. The code of the Court of Arbitration for Sport:Commentary, cases and materials[M]. Alphen aan den Rijn:Kluwer Law International,2015:127-128
[12]高薇.论司法对国际体育仲裁的干预[J].环球法律评论，2017,39(6):172-186
[13]贺鉴.论欧洲区域性国际人权保护制度[J].贵州师范大学学报（社会科学版），2005(2):13-17
[14]SFT. 4A_412/2021[EB/OL].[2024-04-12]. https://www.bger.ch/ext/eurospider/live/fr/php/aza/http/index.php?lang=fr&type=highlight_simple_query&page=1&from_date=&to_date=&s ort=relevance&insertion_date=&top_subcollection_aza=all&query_words=4A_412%2F2021&rank=1&azaclir=aza&hig hlight_docid=aza%3A%2F%2F21-04-2022-4A_412-2021&num ber_of_ranks=145
[15]郭树理.运动员诉权保障与《欧洲人权公约》：欧洲人权法院佩希施泰因案件述评[J].武汉体育学院学报，2019,53(9):54-60
[16]ECtHR. Guide on Article 6 of the Convention–Right to a fair trial(civil limb)[EB/OL].[2024-04-12]. https://ks.echr.coe.int/documents/d/echr-ks/guide_art_6_civil_eng
[17]高薇.论《欧洲人权公约》的仲裁适用[J].中外法学，2020,32(6):1634-1658
[18]ECtHR. Article 6(civil)Arbitration[EB/OL].[2024-04-20]. https://ks.echr.coe.int/documents/d/echr-ks/arbitration
[19]ECtHR. Guide on Article 6 of the Convention–Right to a fair trial(criminal limb)[EB/OL].[2024-04-12]. https://ks.echr.coe.int/documents/d/echr-ks/guide_art_6_criminal_eng
[20]徐亚文.欧洲人权公约中的程序正义条款初探[J].法学评论，2003,21(5):18-25
[21]梁晓莹.《欧洲人权公约》与国际体育仲裁的关系综述[J].体育科研，2023,44(5):23-35
[22]CAS. Arbitration CAS 2020/A/7596 Aleksandrina Naydenova v. Professional Tennis Integrity Officers(PTIOs),award of16 November 2021[EB/OL].[2024-04-23]. https://jurisp rudence.tas-cas.org/Shared%20Documents/7596.pdf
[23]ECtHR. Semenya v. Switzerland(Application no. 10934/21)[EB/OL].[2024-04-12]. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-226011
[24]斯卡默，金健.公正审判权：《欧洲人权公约》第6条视野下的合理时间保障[J].中德法学论坛，2013:32-44
[25]GAO W. The ECHR in action:Its applicability and relevance for arbitration[J]. The International Journal of Human Rights,2022,26(9):1608-1629
[26]ECtHR. Deservire S. R. L. v. Moldova(Application no.17328/04)[EB/OL].[2024-04-20]. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-94642
[27]ECtHR. Stechauner v. Austria(Application no. 20087/06)[EB/OL].[2024-04-20]. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-96998
[28]ECtHR. Puchstein v. Austria(Application no. 20089/06)[EB/OL].[2024-04-20]. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-97000
[29]赵宁.国际商事仲裁裁决撤销制度研究[D].上海：复旦大学，2008:17-18
[30]马永平.延期审理滥用形态之检视与厘正[J].中国刑事法杂志，2011(4):71-78
[31]严存生.法的合理性研究[J].法制与社会发展，2002,8(4):37-49
[32]陈瑞华.看得见的正义[M]. 3版.北京：法律出版社，2019:83-96
[33]汪燕.行政合理性原则与失当行政行为[J].法学评论，2014(5):60-65
[34]LINDHOLM J. The Court of Arbitration for Sport and its jurisprudence:An empirical inquiry into lex sportiva[M].The Hague:T. M. C. Asser Press,2019
[35]黄世席.国际体育仲裁院普通仲裁制度浅析[J].体育与科学，2005,26(6):16-19
[36]陈瑞华.程序价值理论的四个模式[J].中外法学，1996(2):1-7
[37]汪祖兴.效率本位与本位回归：论我国仲裁法的效率之维[J].中国法学，2005(4):113-122
[38]刘苏.体育仲裁的目标价值取向探析：对我国体育仲裁立法的原则指引[J].首都体育学院学报，2006,18(5):13-16
[39]汪祖兴.仲裁的经济性与中国仲裁的监督机制[J].现代法学，1999(2):78-80
[40]李世清.延期审理的理性分析[J].河北法学，2008,26(5):193-197
[41]熊瑛子.论国际体育仲裁之公开听证机制[J].天津体育学院学报，2020,35(6):716-721
[42]张春良，卿莹. CAS仲裁法典最新发展述评[J].武汉体育学院学报，2012,46(9):36-41
[43]韩勇.体育纪律处罚争议解决中的体育协会内部仲裁与外部体育仲裁关系研究[J].仲裁研究，2006(4):33-42
[44]RIGOZZI A,MCAULIFFE W,KAUFMANN-KOHLER L.Sports arbitration[J]. The European, Middle Eastern and African Arbitration Review,2013,13:15-22
[45]德尔芬尼.民法法系中的律师与体育法[J].赵毅，钟旻桔，译.体育与科学，2014,35(6):85-87
[46]姜世波.欧美体育法学的发展及启示[J].武汉体育学院学报，2013,47(2):30-34
[47]杨雪.宫晓燕：律师为体育健儿征战奥运保驾护航[J].中国律师，2021(9):53-55
[48]FELLAS J，崔起凡.如何实现国际仲裁程序的效率与公平[J].湖州职业技术学院学报，2010,8(2):30-33
基本信息:
DOI：10.16099/j.sus.2024.06.03.0001
中图分类号:G811
引用信息:
[1]郭树理,梁晓莹.国际体育仲裁院多次延期审理的合法性分析——以迅速原则为中心[J].上海体育大学学报,2025,49(09):17-32.DOI:10.16099/j.sus.2024.06.03.0001.
基金信息:
国家社会科学基金项目（23BTY036）