Turkish Football Federation v. 1. Özkan and 2. MKE Ankaragücü [Özkan] No. 4A_566/2009 - Swiss International Arbitration Law Reports (SIALR) - 2010 Vol. 4 Nos. 1 & 2
Page Count:
12 pages
Media Description:
1 PDF Download
Published:
November, 2013
Practice Areas:
Description:
Originally from:
Swiss International Arbitration Law Reports 2010 Vol. 4 Nos. 1 and 2
Preview Page
No. 20
Turkish Football Federation v. 1. Özkan and
2. MKE Ankaragücü
[Özkan]
No. 4A_566/2009
Headnote
■ A national sports federation may bring setting aside proceedings
against an arbitral award provided that it has a legally protected
interest to have the award set aside (obiter).
■ The Federal Supreme Court examines of its own motion whether
an application to set aside is admissible. The petitioner must
nevertheless explain its application to set aside and show that the
requirements of article 76(1) FSCA are met. In so far as it is not
apparent that such requirements are met, it is not a matter for the
Federal Supreme Court to examine whether the application is
admissible (confirmation of previous decisions).
Summary of the Decision
A dispute arose between the football player Mr. Mustafa Özkan and
his team MKE Ankaragücü in connection with the termination of his
employment contract. The Board of Directors of the Turkish Football
Federation decided the dispute partly in favour of Mr. Özkan. Both
parties challenged the decision before the Arbitration Board of Turkish
Football Federation, which confirmed the decision. Mr. Özkan
challenged the decision before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).
The Turkish Football Federation challenged inter alia the CAS’
jurisdiction. By a preliminary decision the CAS panel declared that it
had jurisdiction over the dispute and further allowed the Turkish Football
Federation to intervene in the arbitral proceedings. The Turkish Football
Federation brought proceedings before the Federal Supreme Court
seeking a decision setting aside the CAS panel’s preliminary decision.
The application was declared inadmissible.
The Court recalled that an application to set aside was admissible only
provided that the petitioner had a legally protected interest to have the
challenged award set aside or amended. The Court examined of its own
motion whether an application to set aside was admissible. Nevertheless,
the application to set aside had to be sufficiently and properly explained,
and the petitioner also had to show that the legal requirements of article
76(1) FSCA are met. In so far as it was not apparent that such