Email of the day: Why in the hell does a Swiss court have jurisdiction over the IAAF which isn't based in Switzerland?

The only reason I can think of is IAFF has accounts in Switzerland there and they can order a freeze of accounts. So although the IAFF could ignore the ruling it would destroy them financially.

No idea if this is the case but can think of no other reason.

From another thread:

don't be a moran wrote:

Governments are not going to be bound by an international tribunal that is not appealable to a court. Having appeallate review by the Swiss courts was one of the conditions of setting up the CAS. It is the reason national courts are willing to defer to CAS. Otherwise you would have national courts constantly weighing in and deciding issues within their borders, as for example a US court did in the Butch Reynolds case (which was later overturned).

The CAS is a court of arbitration; its jurisdiction is because the IAAF agreed to it, and that's because the olympics agreed to it.

The IAAF will never accept the decision, so hopefully it will demand that the olympics withdraw from the arbitration agreement or, better yet, dump the olympics. The olympics is the centerpiece of failure and corruption that prevents track from being popular.

Umm, basics here.

IAAF by its Constitution allows appeals to the CAS.

CAS by its Constitution allows appeals to the Swiss Federal Court.

What's not to understand?

LetsRun.com wrote:

Can the IAAF due that here?

I don't no if them can due that anywheres.

See the 2011 CAS Bulletin articleAppeals against Arbitral Awards by the CAS ...................................................................................................................... 19 (same issue as the ABP program).

II. The Statutory Right of Appeal

The parties can appeal against an international arbitral award on the grounds set out in Art. 190(2) Switzerland’s Federal Code on Private International Law (IPRG). This is intended to ensure that the arbitral proceedings fulfill the minimum requirements of the state legal system so that an arbitral award can be recognised and enforced like a state court judgment. Said minimum requirements are the independence of the arbitrators (Art. 180 Switzerland’s Federal Code on Private International Law (IPRG)), the equal treatment of the parties and their right to a fair hearing and adversarial proceedings (Art. 182(3) Switzerland’s Federal Code on Private International Law (IPRG)).

As the previous poster tried to say: IAAF bound themselves to the CAS arbitral tribunal, which in turn is bound by the Swiss Code.

you have time to make these posts

but not time to delete posts advocating the elimination of a race from our country? a post that was reported yesterday?

and time to delete posts complaining about that post?

care to explain?

Why the hell, as an organization that claims to be journalists covering the sport of track and field, are you unable or unwilling to understand even the basics of how these things work?

manage your time wrote:

you have time to make these posts

but not time to delete posts advocating the elimination of a race from our country? a post that was reported yesterday?

and time to delete posts complaining about that post?

care to explain?

rojo is amused by racism. You should e-mail him with examples. He will act all indignant if you say that he tolerates racism and then claim that he doesn't have time to actually look at the message board.

Regarding the procedure, it seems that Semenya has about 2-3 months to compete until a ruling:

The appeal is served on the opposing party and the CAS for their comments within 20 days. The period for filing a reply can be extended. There are no other prescribed written submissions. The Swiss Federal Tribunal usually pronounces its judgment without hearing the parties any further. Often the parties are initially only notified of the actual decision; the reasons are then delivered subsequently within a further period of 6 to 8 weeks. On average, the Swiss Federal Tribunal

requires approximately 4 months until the reasoned decision is delivered.

It's still a bit unclear why SFT stayed the CAS decision in the interim in the first place, probably because that seemed less burdensome overall (and not a commentary on likelihood of prospects).

this is all so basic wrote:

Why the hell, as an organization that claims to be journalists covering the sport of track and field, are you unable or unwilling to understand even the basics of how these things work?

+1. Modern "journalism" is to crowd-source. Decades ago they would have perused the CAS Statutes themselves, or called the CAS, etc.

Bad Wigins wrote:

The CAS is a court of arbitration; its jurisdiction is because the IAAF agreed to it, and that's because the olympics agreed to it.

The IAAF will never accept the decision, so hopefully it will demand that the olympics withdraw from the arbitration agreement or, better yet, dump the olympics. The olympics is the centerpiece of failure and corruption that prevents track from being popular.

Bingo! Bad Wigins hit the nail on the head!

Short term pain, long term gain.

brojos smarter bro wrote:

LetsRun.com wrote:

Can the IAAF due that here?

I don't no if them can due that anywheres.

I almost laughed out loud. It was literally a chuckle.

.///./././..././../././//. wrote:

this is all so basic wrote:

Why the hell, as an organization that claims to be journalists covering the sport of track and field, are you unable or unwilling to understand even the basics of how these things work?

+1. Modern "journalism" is to crowd-source. Decades ago they would have perused the CAS Statutes themselves, or called the CAS, etc.

It is a crying shame to think of how many Ivy league educations are being wasted on their "journalism"

.///./././..././../././//. wrote:

this is all so basic wrote:

Why the hell, as an organization that claims to be journalists covering the sport of track and field, are you unable or unwilling to understand even the basics of how these things work?

+1. Modern "journalism" is to crowd-source. Decades ago they would have perused the CAS Statutes themselves, or called the CAS, etc.

It is completely unfair to accuse this site of being either 'modern' or 'journalism'

Bad Wigins wrote:

The CAS is a court of arbitration; its jurisdiction is because the IAAF agreed to it, and that's because the olympics agreed to it.

The IAAF will never accept the decision, so hopefully it will demand that the olympics withdraw from the arbitration agreement or, better yet, dump the olympics. The olympics is the centerpiece of failure and corruption that prevents track from being popular.

The IAAF is so corrupt that the IOC won't even allow Coe on its executive committee:

why worry about posts on this website advocating eliminating entire races of people from this country when there is 1 transgender athlete DOMINATING d2 ?

manage your time wrote:

you have time to make these posts

but not time to delete posts advocating the elimination of a race from our country? a post that was reported yesterday?

and time to delete posts complaining about that post?

care to explain?

:'(

manage your time wrote:

you have time to make these posts

but not time to delete posts advocating the elimination of a race from our country? a post that was reported yesterday?

and time to delete posts complaining about that post?

care to explain?

Indeed, they do tend to ignore the ZA posters promoting genocide of the Boers.