The case of CAS 2009/A/1783 Rob Woestenborghs v. International Triathlon Union (ITU) centered on the disqualification of Belgian duathlete Rob Woestenborghs during the 2008 Duathlon World Championships in Rimini, Italy. The incident occurred during the cycling leg when Woestenborghs was accused of causing another competitor, Jürgen Dereere, to fall. No officials witnessed the event, but protests were filed by Dereere and a French team delegate. The Competition Jury (CJ), composed of three members instead of the required five for a World Championship event, conducted a hearing without formal records or review of available video footage. Sarah Springman, a jury member with a potential conflict of interest due to her nationality, participated in questioning but was excluded from deliberations. The CJ disqualified Woestenborghs based on testimonies, but the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) later found the process flawed.
The CAS panel, comprising Quentin Byrne-Sutton, Guido De Croock, and Richard McLaren, ruled that the disqualification was invalid due to procedural errors and lack of proper authority. The panel clarified that while field-of-play decisions, termed "Judgement Calls" under ITU rules, are generally not reviewable, exceptions exist for cases involving bad faith, corruption, or breaches of fundamental principles. The CJ's decision was deemed invalid because it exceeded its authority, as only on-field officials could make Judgement Calls based on direct observation. The panel also highlighted the CJ's improper composition and failure to adhere to procedural fairness, including the lack of documentation and failure to review video evidence.
Woestenborghs appealed the disqualification to the ITU Executive Board (EB), which upheld the CJ's decision after delays, citing it as a non-reviewable field-of-play ruling. Dissatisfied, Woestenborghs filed an appeal with the CAS, arguing violations of due process. The CAS examined jurisdictional issues, noting ambiguities in the EB's decision-making process and inconsistencies in ITU communications. The panel determined that the CJ's decision was not a valid Judgement Call and that the EB's upholding of it was procedurally flawed.
Ultimately, the CAS overturned the disqualification, reinstating Woestenborghs as the winner and ordering the ITU to correct the official classification. The case underscored the importance of adhering to procedural rules and proper authority in sports adjudication, emphasizing that deviations from established processes can invalidate decisions. The ruling also clarified the scope of CAS jurisdiction in reviewing field-of-play decisions, balancing respect for referees' expertise with the need to address procedural violations. The case concluded with all other motions dismissed, finalizing the matter without further action.