Tag Archives: ex aequo et bono

Is the BAT Fair? The Danger of no Appeals Process and the Arbitrator’s ex aequo et bono Power

FacebookTwitterGoogle+LinkedInEmailShare
Is the BAT arbitration process unfair?

Is this unfair?

In recent articles we have explored the ex aequo et bono rule of law and lack of a real appeals process in the BAT. In this article I will combine these two concepts together to discuss the potential dangers of a system such as the BAT.

 

The relationship between the BAT and FIBA may call into question the independence of the BAT. In the early days of the BAT, the tribunal was called the FIBA Arbitral Tribunal. The BAT was originally funded by FIBA and is still to this day guaranteed by FIBA. See FIBA Reg 296 (The financing of the BAT is guaranteed by FIBA, it being understood that the BAT is designed to be self-financing). The tribunal’s name was changed in an attempt to make the independence of the BAT more clear (it was also changed so people would stop referring to the female BAT secretariat as the “FAT lady”).

 

This name change may have been partly influenced by a similar relationship between the Court of Arbitration for Sport (“CAS”) and the International Olympic Committee (“IOC”). … Read More

Appealing a BAT Award

BAT awards may no longer be appealable except in very limited situations. But that wasn’t always the case. From its inception in 2006 until 2010, the BAT included in every award a section titled “Appeal,” under which the following paragraph was included:

 

Awards of the FAT can only be appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), Lausanne, Switzerland and any such appeal must be lodged with CAS within 21 days from the communication of the award. The CAS shall decide the appeal ex aequo et bono and in accordance with the Code of Sports-related Arbitration, in particular the Special Provisions Applicable to the Appeal Arbitration Procedure.

 

http://www.fiba.com/downloads/v3_expe/bat/110401_BAT_Standard_Clause.PDF. Also, prior to 2010, the BAT standard arbitration clause contained similar language outlining the appeal process.

 

However, in 2010 FIBA and the BAT removed the appeal language from the awards and the standard arbitration clause in an effort to maximize leverage against breaching teams. Not unsurprisingly many teams were intentionally breaching contracts, not participating in the arbitration, and appealing the BAT awards to postpone as long as possible payment of the award.… Read More

The Rule of Law in BAT Cases: Ex Aequo et Bono

380x285-cz5tOne of the most common questions we hear about BAT cases is what law does the Tribunal use. The answer: ex aequo et bono, which is a Latin phrase that means “In equity and good conscience” legal-dictionary.com. The BAT rules state ex aequo et bono means the arbitrator applies “general considerations of justice and fairness without reference to any particular national or international law.” BAT Rule 15.1. But what does that mean? Essentially, the BAT decides cases based on fairness and equity for the betterment of the parties.

 

This can be a confusing concept for many who are used to state and federal statutes being applied in their home courts. Especially individuals who come from civil law jurisdictions based on the Napoleonic Code, which include most of Europe and Latin America. The civil code is a series of very specific statutes that pronounce the law in a particular state. The law is written, stemming from statutes, and is not decided by the particular tribunal hearing the dispute.… Read More