CAS奥运会特别仲裁临时措施实践缺陷之批判  

Criticism on the Imperfect Practice of Provisional Measures in CAS AHD

作　　者：郭树理[1] 梁晓莹 GUO Shuli;LIANG Xiaoying(Kenneth Wang School of Law,Soochow University,Suzhou 215006,Jiangsu,China)

机构地区：[1]苏州大学王健法学院,江苏苏州215006

出　　处：《上海体育学院学报》2023年第5期15-24,共10页Journal of Shanghai University of Sport

基　　金：国家社会科学基金青年项目(20CTY010);江苏省研究生科研与实践创新计划项目(KYCX22_3145)。

摘　　要：临时措施是一项程序性救济制度,鉴于国际体育仲裁院(CAS)奥运会特别仲裁临时措施的特殊性,以CAS特别仲裁分院审理的奥运会案件为样本进行分析。结果显示:CAS仲裁庭通常拒绝授予临时措施,这种保守实践虽基本上是规则正常适用的结果,但“司法”实践的可解释性并不能消解“立法”实践的不合理性;CAS仲裁规则中对临时措施规则的严格规定导致裁决结果引发争议,反映出临时措施的规则本身也具有保守性。同时,CAS部分仲裁庭超越临时措施的适用范围,误用了临时措施审理兴奋剂违规临时停赛案件,对体育规则进行了改写。保守实践与误用实践均有损CAS的权威,不利于实现临时措施制度倾斜保护申请人的目的,还会异化CAS临时措施制度的程序性质。A provisional measure is considered a procedural relief system.In view of the specialty of provisional measures in the Olympic Games CAS Ad Hoc Division(CAS AHD),the Olympic Games cases heard by the CAS AHD are explored.The statistics of the above cases tells that provisional measures have been rarely granted to the applicants,applying a conservative nature.The analysis shows that the conservative practice is basically the result of the normal application of the rules;however,this interpretability of the"judicial"practice does not solve the irrationality of the"legislative"practice.The controversial decisions reveal that the strict regulation of provisional measures in CAS rules was the important reason,and the strict regulation itself was also a conservative practice.Meanwhile,some arbitral tribunals misapplied the provisional measure beyond the scope to provisional suspension relating to anti-doping rule violation and rewrote the sport rules.Both of these practices undermine the authority of CAS,which does not help to achieve the purpose of protecting the applicant.In addition,they alienate the procedural law nature of the CAS provisional measures.

关 键 词：国际体育仲裁院 奥运会 体育仲裁 临时措施 临时停赛 运动员权利 

分 类 号：G80-05[文化科学—运动人体科学]