The document discusses an advisory opinion request submitted by Federation Y. to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) on September 14, 1995. The request sought confirmation from the CAS that Federation Y. was the relevant governing body for sport X. The President of the CAS reviewed the request under Article R61 of the Code of Sports-related Arbitration, which allows the President to determine whether a request is suitable for an advisory opinion. According to Article R60 of the Code, the purpose of the consultative procedure is to clarify legal points for authorized entities, not to resolve disputes. The CAS practice emphasizes that this procedure should not replace arbitration, which is the proper mechanism for dispute resolution under the Code.
Upon examining Federation Y.'s request, the CAS President found that the questions raised were clearly linked to an ongoing dispute, which had already been submitted to the Commission of the European Communities under Articles 85 and 86 of the Treaty of Rome. Granting an advisory opinion in this case would contradict the legislative intent of the Code, the spirit of the consultative procedure, and established CAS practice. It would also misuse the advisory mechanism by attempting to bypass arbitration, which is the appropriate legal remedy available to the parties.
Consequently, the CAS President ruled that Federation Y.'s request could not be the subject of an advisory opinion, as it sought to resolve a dispute rather than clarify a legal issue. The decision reaffirmed the distinction between advisory opinions and arbitration, ensuring that the consultative procedure is not exploited to circumvent formal dispute resolution processes. The ruling underscores the CAS's commitment to maintaining the integrity of its procedures and adhering to the principles outlined in the Code of Sports-related Arbitration.