Currency converter
All news
News Search Topics
Use filter
You can filter your feed,
by choosing only interesting

Swiss court upholds CAS decision on Russian track-and-field athletes

August 08, 2016, 17:17 UTC+3

Russian athlete Sergei Shubenkov confirmed Federal Court in Lausanne turned down the appeal

1 pages in this article
Sergei Shubenkov

Sergei Shubenkov

© Alexander Scherbak/TASS

MOSCOW, August 8 /TASS/. The Federal Supreme Court in Lausanne has dismissed appeals of two-time Olympic pole vault champion Yelena Isinbayeva and Sergei Shubenkov, the 2015 world champion in hurdles 110 m, to the ruling of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).

Spokesman for the Swiss Federal Court in Lausanne Peter Josi earlier confirmed to TASS that the court had received an appeal from Russian track and field athletes Isinbayeva and Shubenkov.

"Yes, it is true," Shubenkov told TASS.

"I cannot go into particulars. The only thing I can say is that it was an appeal to suspend the CAS verdict until the court prepares its analysis. That will in no way stop us from further actions, which will follow when CAS is ready with the analysis - presumably late in August after the Olympic Games. Then we will act according to plan. It was just the first minor step," Shubenkov said.

Russian athletes were banned from the Rio Olympics 2016 because of the disqualification of the All-Russian Athletics Federation (RAF). Darya Klishina, who lives and trains abroad, was the only Russian athlete allowed to compete in the Rio Olympics.

Under the Swiss Constitution, the Federal Court is the highest judiciary on civil, criminal, administrative and constitutional cases. However, Swiss lawyers explained that although the Federal Court is authorized to cancel the CAS decision, it is not empowered to pass a new one. Besides, a CAS decision can be challenged in the Federal Court on a limited number of cases. For example, it can be possible if members of the court of arbitration were not properly appointed; if the court erroneously recognized that the dispute was within or out of its jurisdiction; if the principle of equality of arms was violated and if the court of arbitration left the case without consideration or passed a decision contradicting the principle of public order.

Show more
In other media
Partner News