摘要
根据《奥林匹克宪章》第74条之规定,位于瑞士洛桑的国际体育仲裁院是奥运会赛事争议的唯一管辖机构,该仲裁机构的庭审模式直接构成北京奥运会赛事争议的消解方式。辩论式与纠问式、复审制与续审制、书面审与口头审、合法审与合理审这4对对立范畴是当今仲裁庭审模式的4种风格。鉴于国际体育仲裁裁决具有极强的时效性并关涉公共利益,由此决定国际体育仲裁院庭审模式应当倾向于纠问式、复审制、口头审和合理审,在这一宏观前提下辨证结合辩论式、续审制、书面审和合法审之优势。
According to Article 74 of Olympic Charter, International Court of Arbitration for Sport which is situated in Swiss is the only governing body to arbitrate disputes arising from Olympic Games, so the trial model of CAS can directly decide the character of Beijing Olympic Games disputes resolution. Adversary and inquisitorial procedure, part review and full review procedure, written and oral procedure, review on law and appropriation principle are the four styles of trial models. Considering the higher efficiency and public interests of international sports arbitration awards, the Court of Arbitration for Sport should play heavy weight on inquisitorial procedure, full review procedure, oral procedure and appropriation principle. The advantages of adversary procedure, part review procedure, written procedure and review on law procedure also should be paid attention to.
出处
《天津体育学院学报》
CAS
CSSCI
北大核心
2008年第1期46-49,共4页
Journal of Tianjin University of Sport
基金
教育部人文社会科学研究项目(项目编号:05JA82002)
西南政法大学校级课题重点项目(项目编号:06XZ-ZD-21)
