A Russian court sends a sportsman to CAS according to jurisdiction again

Russian courts terminate disputes in the sphere of football more and more often. They believe that the Court for Sports Arbitration in Lausanne is competent to settle them.

The Khamovnichesky district court of Moscow considered on October 25 of 2013 the case of the claim moved by G.M.Nishnianidze against the All-Russian Social Organization Russian Football Union (hereinafter – the RFU) and the All-Russian Social Organization Indoor Football Association of Russia (hereinafter – the AIFR).

The player of the New Generation club requested to rule invalid clause 3.51 of Article 3 of the Regulations of the Russian Indoor Football Championship, according to which the number of legionaries that the club could include in the application list for the competition was limited to four.

In particular, the sportsman insisted that the provision did not comply with the national legislation, was discriminative and violated his right to work.

Attorneys of the RFU and the AIFR – Associate of the Law Firm "YUST" Dmitry Zhubrin and Assistant Associate Darina Nikitina – in their turn, stated: the disputes involving football subjects are beyond the competence of general jurisdiction courts and should be considered by the Court of Arbitration for Sports in Lausanne.

The Khamovnichesky district court of Moscow agreed with the arguments of the respondent and terminated the proceedings.

We remind that this is not the first time, when the courts acknowledge the CAS as the jurisdictional authority for settling sports disputes. For example, the Khamovnichesky district court of Moscow drew the same conclusion regarding the case of S.V.Bernikov, a former foorball coach, who contested the decision of the Supervision and Disciplinary Committee of the RFU. The associates of the Sports Law Group of the Law Firm "YUST", headed by Mikhail Prokopets, also represented the RFU on said case in all instances.