摘要
瑞士联邦最高法院在审查国际体育仲裁院的裁决时,可因其违反平等听证原则而撤销之。平等听证系当事人的一项程序性权利,其内涵和外延不容易被精确界定,可能会被误用。从目前不服国际体育仲裁院裁决的上诉情况来看,该理由已成为运用频率最高的理由之一。从瑞士联邦最高法院撤销体育仲裁裁决的情况来看,截止至2018年11月,共计撤销案件总数为10起,其中3起是由于仲裁庭未尊重当事人的平等听证权利,另有5起案件将其作为附带上诉理由。考察瑞士联邦最高法院的实践可知:仲裁裁决的主体问题和附带问题均适用平等听证原则;违反该项原则的判定,需满足当事人充分举证、先前仲裁程序中以正当方式提及、事项可能影响裁决结果等几项条件。同时,未公开召开听证会、实体问题的裁决出现错误或法律适用错误,均不构成对平等听证原则的违反。中国运动员应当熟悉体育纠纷的仲裁与司法审查途径,保障自身合法权益。待体育仲裁制度构建后,中国法院对仲裁裁决进行司法审查时,可以借鉴瑞士法院的相关经验。平等对待内国仲裁和涉外仲裁,变"双轨制"为"单轨制",充分尊重仲裁裁决的终局性,将司法审查的范围集中于程序性事项,力求构建体育组织、体育仲裁机构、国家法院等多主体的运动员权益保障机制。
Principle of right of hearing is one of the fundamental principle in sports arbitration which has an imprecise intension and extension.Swiss Federal Tribunal (SFT) may revoke an award by Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) when it violates the principle of right of hearing.Considering the situation of appeal to SFT,violating the right of hearing is one of the most-used reason for appellants.By the end of November,2018,SFT has revoked 10 sport arbitration awards,3 of them are related to the principle of right of hearing,and another 5 awards refer to this reason as the supplementary reason.From the practice of Swiss Federal Tribunal,we can get conclusions that principle of right of hearing applies to either main part or annexation of the arbitration;Of the award,certain conditions should be satisfied when judges estimate whether the case violates this principle.These conditions are discharging the burden of proof by the par-ties,the alleged issues are being related to the final award,the assertion has been raised in the arbitration procedure and so on.Not holding a hearing in public,as well as wrong application of law,which are not evidences of violation of the principle of right of hearing.Chinese athletes should learn the whole institution of sports disputes arbitration and judicial review system to protect their rights.China can also learn principles of reviewing from SFT after sport arbitration institution established.Courts in China should treat international and national arbitration equally and transfer dual-track approach to single-track approach.Jurisprudence in China should respect the finality of sport arbitral awards,and only review the procedure issues.We should strive to establish the mechanism which is constituted by sport organizations,CAS and national courts to protect athletes' fundamental rights.
作者
熊瑛子
XIONG Yingzi(School of PE,Soochow University,Suzhou 215021,China;Kenneth Wang School of Law,Soochow University,Suzhou 215006,China)
出处
《天津体育学院学报》
CAS
CSSCI
北大核心
2018年第6期466-471,484,共7页
Journal of Tianjin University of Sport
基金
国家社会科学基金重大项目(项目编号:16ZDA225)
中国博士后科学基金第59批资助项目(项目编号:2016M590491)
关键词
听证权利
仲裁庭
司法审查
right of hearing
arbitration court
judicial review
