The main reasons given by the parties in sports disputes are discussed below. The grounds for the review of internal premiums are less restrictive, both in terms of quantity and in terms of the jurisdiction of the national court (Article 393 SPK). The parties may provide that appeals against premiums are filed with the higher cantonal court and not with the SFT (Art. 390 SPV). See Hovaguimian (2018) for the criticism of the SFT`s lack of fact-checking on the basis of Article 190 PILA. Since it has been argued that the existence of an arbitration agreement before an arbitral tribunal outside Switzerland has been properly examined for the validity of the arbitration clause with full jurisdiction (BGE 121 III 38 at 2b; see also BGE 122 III 139, 2b p. 142 [on the existence of an alleged arbitration agreement in Switzerland cf. on the contrary, BGE 122 III 139 at 2b, Decision 4C.44/1996 of 31 October 1996, 2, on an examination of the first facie and the criticisms of Poudret/Besson, a.i.O., p. 431 et seq., paragraph 502, de Berger v Kellerhals, Arbitrage international et interne en Suisse, 2006, p. 112 f.r. 316 f. and Berti, a.a.O., No. 8 to Article 7 PILA; Judgment 4C.206/1996 of 16 July 1997, 7b/bb-cc and 4C.40/2003 of 19 May 2003, 3; But also the efforts to revise Article 7 of the DIP to give priority to the Court of International Arbitration over its jurisdiction, before the State Court: Pierre-Yves Tschanz, On the Advisability of Modifying Art.

7 LDIP, ASA Bull. 2010, p. 478 et seq.). The Bundesgericht exercises free judicial review as to whether or not the first instance infringed Article II(3) DEC (Art. 95(b) BGG in determining the ineffectiveness of the arbitration clause). But the Swiss courts have taken a new step to protect the autonomy of sports federations. It applies to the whole of jurisdiction where the contested decision of an association concerns the so-called `rules of the game`. Footnote 13 This approach to sport litigation is based on the view that sport is a purely recreational activity that has no legally protected interest. The application of the theory of the rules of the game meant, at least in the first years before the mid-1970s, the exclusion of most disputes in the sports world from judicial review, since the rules of the game, as understood by the Swiss courts at the time, included all the rules of sports organizations on the practice of sport, Like what. B rules relating to qualification to competition, licences, transfers and decisions, including sanctions, during games or games and beyond. Only a very small part of the disputes between sports federations or federations and their members – typically with regard to the organization and participation in different bodies of the association, membership fees, etc.

– have been accepted for consideration by the courts, as would have been the case for any type of association, since the courts consider that this category of decisions concerns the application of legal rules. rules of rights). . . .