The case involves an appeal by the Federazione Italiana Nuoto (FIN) against a decision by the Fédération Internationale de Natation Amateur (FINA) to suspend the Italian Junior Men's Water Polo Team from the IX Junior World Water Polo Championships. The suspension stemmed from a disciplinary incident during the VIII Junior Men's World Water Polo Championships in Dunkerque in 1995, where a fight broke out between Italian and Croatian players after their match. The Technical Water Polo Committee (TWPC) of FINA investigated the incident and initially excluded both teams from the ongoing championships. Later, the TWPC recommended that only Italy be suspended from the next Junior World Championships, citing Italy as the instigator. The FINA Bureau upheld this decision after a hearing in 1996, leading FIN to appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).
The CAS examined the admissibility of the appeal, confirming that FIN had met procedural requirements, including filing within the stipulated time frame and exhausting all internal remedies. The CAS noted its limited authority to intervene in sanctions imposed by sports federations, emphasizing it could only review decisions if the rules applied were contrary to general legal principles, arbitrary, or if the sanctions were excessive or unfair. The CAS found that the FINA Bureau acted within its authority and that the sanctions aligned with the Interim Guidelines for Disciplinary Action in Water Polo, which had been communicated to all teams before the event. The Interim Guidelines, later formalized as "Regulations for Disciplinary Actions in Water Polo at FINA Events," included Article 5, mandating ejection for bench player involvement in disciplinary incidents. The TWPC recommended barring Italy from the 1997 Junior World Championships, a decision upheld by the FINA Bureau and confirmed on appeal.
FIN argued the sanction was excessively harsh and unfairly punished uninvolved athletes, but the Panel emphasized it could only intervene if the rules violated legal principles or were arbitrary or excessive, which it found not to be the case. The Panel acknowledged the sanction's educative purpose, encouraging coaches to prevent future misconduct, though it expressed regret that individual players involved were not personally penalized. It suggested national federations consider individual sanctions for violent conduct but noted challenges in implementing such measures without videotape evidence. Ultimately, the CAS upheld the FINA Bureau's decision, concluding the suspension was justified under the applicable rules and that there was no basis to overturn it. The decision reinforced the autonomy of sports federations in disciplinary matters, provided their actions align with established rules and principles. The Court of Arbitration for Sport dismissed the appeal, affirming the sanction was neither contrary to legal principles nor arbitrary, excessive, or unfair based on the evidence.