In an era when “we are all legal realists now”, perfect impartiality - the complete absence of bias or prejudice - is at most an ideal, with “impartial enough” becoming, of necessity, the realistic goal. Understanding when imperfectly impartial is nonetheless impartial enough is aided by conceptualizing judicial impartiality in three distinct dimensions: a procedural dimension in which impartiality affords parties a fair hearing; a political dimension in which impartiality promotes public confidence in the courts; and an ethical dimension in which impartiality is a standard of good conduct core to a judge’s self-definition.
Mention the concepts of “independence and impartiality” to a sports lawyer in 2015 and you are unlikely to walk away without a (spirited) discussion on everything from the structure of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) to the issue of the repeated appointment of CAS arbitrators.
Such issues are not exclusive to sports or CAS arbitration, however it is fair to say that the last year has seen some particularly interesting developments in this regard. Recognising that the issues are both complicated and contentious, this contribution is intended to provide a brief and practical presentation of the multifaceted concepts of “independence and impartiality” in sports arbitration.
The contribution commences with a discussion of the structure of CAS and recent court decisions concerning same (Section I), before considering the concepts of independence and impartiality with respect to the CAS arbitrators themselves...
Why not join us?
Football Legal is an independent media publishing football law contents on a daily basis dedicated to all football law practitioners (lawyers, clubs, federations, intermediaries, football stakeholders, etc.).
Register today and stay tuned to the latest legal news.
Get started
