国际体育仲裁院仲裁证明标准研究

The Standard of Proof Applied by the Court of Arbitration for Sport

国际体育仲裁院仲裁庭根据案件类型和主体的不同,对证明标准作出了区别规定。在体育组织明文规定采用或然性权衡标准、运动员明示同意或然性权衡标准及证据伪造案件中,证明标准被确定为或然性权衡标准。放心满意标准则适用于体育组织规则中专门就此作出规定、兴奋剂案件、操控比赛案件、搭桥转会案件等4类情形。在后3类情形中,放心满意标准仅适用于体育组织;对于运动员、俱乐部而言,仅需满足或然性权衡标准。作为放心满意标准来源的英美法中,英国、加拿大等国最高法院均不予承认该标准作为单独证明标准,而是将其统一于或然性权衡标准。因此,放心满意标准的适用极有可能被限定于仲裁"先例"所确认的4类特定案件中。

Comfortable satisfaction is not the unique standard of proof adopted by the Court of Arbitration for Sport(CAS).Different parties have to satisfy different standards of proof in different categories of cases.The balance of probabilities applies in three kinds of cases:the standard is stated in the rules of sports organizations;the athlete has signed consent form including the standard;whether the evidence was forged or not.However,if the sports organizations have maintained the athletes satisfying the comfortable satisfaction standard,liie CAS will show great respect to it.In doping cases,match-fixing cases,and bridge transfer cases,if no special rule prescribed by the sports organizations,the CAS applies comfortable satisfaction as to sports organizations,while athletes and clubs only have to satisfy the balance of probabilities standard.The comfortable satisfaction arises from the common law system.The UK Supreme Court and the Canadian Supreme Court have already rejected to achnit the independence of the comfortable satisfaction,which is essentially a part of the balance of probabilities.Therefore,the comfortable satisfaction adopted by the CAS may restricted by the“precedents”of the CAS,applied only in the above four categories of cases.