Journal of Siberian Federal University. Humanities & Social Sciences: Problems of Proof in Football Clubs’ Disciplinary Liability for Match-Fixing: Practice of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS)

Journal of Siberian Federal University. Humanities & Social Sciences / Problems of Proof in Football Clubs’ Disciplinary Liability for Match-Fixing: Practice of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) (2009–2014)

Full text (.pdf)

Issue: Journal of Siberian Federal University. Humanities & Social Sciences. 2019 12 (3)
Authors: Jun, Cai; Vasilyev, Ilia A.; Izmalkova, Margarita P.; Dongmei, Pang; Khalatova, Raisa I.
Contact information: Jun, Cai: Henan University Ming Lun Str., Kaifeng, Henan, 475001, China; ; Vasilyev, Ilia A.: Saint Petersburg State University 7/9 University Embankment, St. Petersburg, 199034, Russia; ; Izmalkova, Margarita P.: Independent Researcher 1 Heves Str., Cheboksary, Chuvash Republic, 428024, Russia; ; Dongmei, Pang: Henan University Ming Lun Str., Kaifeng, Henan, 475001, China; Khalatova, Raisa I.: Independent Researcher 55 Stachek, St. Petersburg, 198096, Russia
Keywords: disciplinary liability of clubs; match-fixing; manipulations of sports results; liability of clubs for match-fixing; practice of the Court of Arbitration for Sport
Abstract: Match-fixing is one of the most serious threats to professional football. As noted in one of the decisions of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), CAS 2014/A/3628, “… the protection of the integrity of the competitions is absolutely essential for UEFA, as match fixing is considered to be the biggest threat to sport because it touches at the very essence of the principles of loyalty, integrity and sportsmanship”. In this article CAS decisions for the period 2009–2014 on cases related to the liability of clubs for match-fixing by officials or players are systematically introduced into scientific circulation. For this purpose, the authors consider the arguments of the parties and CAS in disputes and make the following conclusions. First, the arbitration is not inclined to impose a conditional sanction or reduce the size of the sanction on the basis of proportionality. Secondly, CAS considers an administrative measure to be different in nature from sanctions and therefore not subject to the principle of proportionality. Thirdly, the application of the principle of strict liability allows to hold the clubs that participated in match-fixing activities liable without proving the existence of the club’s consent to illegal actions. Fourthly, in order to protect the integrity of sport CAS accepts the use of a wide range of evidence to confirm the fact of match-fixing, including the evidence, the application of which is deemed unacceptable in national legal systems
Pages: 343-362
Paper at repository of SibFU: https://elib.sfu-kras.ru/handle/2311/110042

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0).