国际体育仲裁院遵循先例制度的形成与展望——以兴奋剂案件为例

Establishment and Prospect of a System for Following Precedents in the Court of Arbitration for Sport——Taking Doping Cases as an Example

在国际体育仲裁院(CAS)仲裁的诸多案件中,存在援引、遵循先前案件仲裁裁决的现象。以上诉仲裁程序中兴奋剂案件的实体裁决为例,对援引先例的实践进行梳理。研究显示:从卡尔威克案起,国际体育仲裁院援引先例的实践经历了3个阶段,有仲裁庭主动援引与被动援引2种方式,也出现了链式引用与高频引用2种独特现象。CAS仲裁庭援引先例,离不开CAS作为国际体育纠纷解决机构的垄断性、仲裁员的名单封闭性以及兴奋剂案件所适用准据法的一致性与强制性3个基础。然而,仍然存在CAS仲裁庭对先例的援引在行动和表述上不一致、先例援引缺乏统一标准以及先例对后案拘束力存疑等问题。因而,亟待从必要性、可行性与确立要点3方面出发,提出确立CAS遵循先例制度的构想。

Among many cases arbitrated by the Court of Arbitration for Sport(CAS),there is a phenomenon that precedents are cited and followed.By defining the substantive adjudication of the doping cases in appeal cases as the research category,and summarizing the formation of precedents,it can be seen that the development of precedents has gone through three stages since the Cullwick;there are two ways of citing:active citing and passive citing,and there are also two phenomena:chain citing and high frequency citing.The development of CAS precedent cannot be separated from the monopoly of CAS as an international sports dispute settlement organization,the closed list of arbitrators and the consistency and compulsion of applicable law in doping cases.However,there are also some problems,such as the inconsistency in actions and expressions of precedents cited by CAS,the lack of uniform standards for precedents cited,and doubts about the binding force of precedents on the latter case.Therefore,it is urgent to put forward the idea of establishing a precedent system of the CAS from three aspects:necessity,feasibility and key points.