The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) is the leading international arbitration body specialized in sports-related disputes. It was established in 1984 by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) with the objective of providing an independent, expedited, and technically qualified forum for resolving conflicts within the sporting context.
Headquartered in Lausanne, Switzerland, the CAS has jurisdiction over a wide range of sports-related disputes. Its scope encompasses both contractual and commercial conflicts, as well as disciplinary and regulatory matters involving athletes, clubs, federations, agents, sponsors, and other entities in the sports ecosystem.
Despite being recognized for its specialization and independence – characteristics that often lead parties to elect it as the arbitral forum in their agreements – resorting to the CAS can entail significant financial costs.
This article focuses on the costs to be considered when parties choose to include an arbitration clause granting the CAS jurisdiction to resolve potential disputes. Understanding and anticipating these costs is essential for making an informed decision and avoiding future surprises and constraints.
1. On the formal jurisdiction of the CAS
The CAS has jurisdiction to resolve sports disputes whenever the parties have agreed to submit the conflict to its authority. Such agreement may stem from:
i. An arbitration clause previously included in a contract or in the statutes of a federation or league; or
ii. A subsequent arbitration agreement in which the parties voluntarily agree to submit to the CAS.
In these instances, the proceedings are classified as an ordinary arbitration procedure.
The CAS is also competent to decide appeals against decisions issued by federations, associations, or other sporting bodies, provided that:
i. The statutes or regulations of such entities expressly recognize the possibility of appeal to the CAS; or
ii. There exists a specific agreement between the parties foreseeing such appeal.
These cases fall under the appeal arbitration procedure.
2. The cost of opting for specialized justice
When, within the context of a contract or agreement, the parties opt to include an arbitration clause granting the CAS jurisdiction to resolve potential disputes, it is important to be aware of the financial implications of that decision.
Arbitration before the CAS involves considerable costs, and under certain circumstances, the Claimant may be required to bear all procedural expenses from the outset until the final decision, as a condition for the proceedings to continue.
a) Court Office Fee
At the time of submitting a request for arbitration before the CAS, the Claimant must pay a fixed and non-refundable administrative fee of CHF 1,000.00.
This payment is a prerequisite for the request to be admitted, but it does not cover the full cost of the proceedings.
b) Advanced Costs
Following the constitution of the arbitral panel, the CAS sets the estimated procedural costs (which include arbitrators’ fees, administrative expenses, and others), along with deadlines and methods of payment.
The advanced costs are determined on a case-by-case basis, meaning that the amounts may vary depending on the particular circumstances of each case. For instance, in proceedings before a sole arbitrator, where the Claimant seeks an award for €1,000,000.00 based on contractual breach, arbitration costs may amount to approximately €50,000.00.
Costs are even higher when the dispute is resolved by a panel of three arbitrators instead of a sole arbitrator.
The advanced costs are settled after the constitution of the arbitral panel and, as a rule, must be paid by the parties in equal shares (half each). Failure to pay the total amount within the prescribed time limit will result in the immediate termination of the arbitration proceedings.
As the continuation of proceedings depends on payment of the advance, it is expected that the Claimant will fulfill their share, as it has a direct interest in the continuation of the process. However, while the general rule provides for equal cost sharing, the CAS will not compel the Respondent to pay their portion. What the CAS requires is merely that the total amount of the advance be paid in full within the prescribed deadline.
In practice, it is common for the Respondent to declare they will not pay their share. In such cases, the Claimant will be invited by the court to cover that amount to ensure continuation of the arbitration. As a reminder, non-payment of the full advance will lead to the termination of the proceedings.
c) Experts, Interpreters, and Witnesses
Each party shall bear the costs associated with the hearing of its own witnesses, experts, and interpreters.
3. And in the end: who pays?
At the conclusion of the proceedings, the CAS will determine the final amount of arbitration costs (which may be higher or lower than the amount advanced), and the arbitral panel will decide how the costs are to be allocated. Possible outcomes include: (i) each party bears its own costs; (ii) costs are split equally between the parties; (iii) each party bears costs proportionate to the outcome; (iv) the losing party bears all costs.
The advanced costs paid by the parties are not reimbursed by the CAS, except for any portion exceeding the final arbitration costs.
Even if the prevailing party has paid the entire advanced costs, there is no guarantee of reimbursement from the opposing party. Reimbursement depends entirely on the final decision of the arbitral panel.
Conclusion
Arbitration before the CAS constitutes a specialized and internationally recognized method of resolving sports-related disputes. However, when parties choose to grant the CAS jurisdiction through a contractual arbitration clause, it is essential to fully understand the financial burdens this decision may entail.
From the initial filing fee to advanced procedural costs—coupled with the risk of bearing all expenses should the Respondent refuse to pay their share—the financial impact can be substantial, especially for the initiating party. Even if costs are ultimately apportioned or reimbursed by panel decision, the initial financial exposure remains a significant risk.
Therefore, the decision to designate the CAS as the arbitral forum must be carefully assessed in light of the associated costs, to ensure that the arbitration clause does not later become a practical obstacle to the effective exercise of the right to legal protection.
por Ricardo Cardoso e Sara Rios Vieira, Área de Prática – Desporto, Moda e Entretenimento
