The case involves a dispute between Peristeri A.C. and the International Basketball Federation (FIBA) regarding the eligibility of an athlete, G. (also referred to as J.M.), to play for the Yugoslav national team. On June 19, 1998, FIBA's Commission of Eligibility ruled that the athlete had Hellenic basketball nationality for club purposes but Yugoslav basketball nationality for national team purposes, as he had previously played for the Yugoslav national team. This decision amended the athlete's Certificate of Citizenship, granting him "limited eligibility" for Greece due to his choice to represent Yugoslavia.
On July 8, 1998, Peristeri A.C. appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), requesting the annulment of FIBA's decision and an injunction to prevent the athlete from participating in the Yugoslav national team. The club sought provisional measures before July 14, 1998, the start of a European Championship. FIBA responded on July 10, arguing that the appeal was improper because Peristeri A.C. had not exhausted internal remedies under FIBA regulations before filing with CAS.
The CAS examined its jurisdiction under Article R47 of its Code, which requires appellants to exhaust internal legal remedies before appealing to CAS. FIBA's regulations stipulated that decisions by the Commission for Legal Matters and Eligibility could be appealed to the Central Board within 30 days. Since Peristeri A.C. had not appealed to the Central Board before approaching CAS, the appeal was premature. The CAS also noted that Article 53 of FIBA's General By-Laws, which provides for CAS jurisdiction in unresolved disputes, did not apply in this case due to the specific appeal process outlined in FIBA's regulations.
Additionally, the CAS found that Peristeri A.C. had not provided sufficient justification for interim measures, as it failed to demonstrate how FIBA's decision affected its interests. Consequently, the CAS ruled that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeal and dismissed both the appeal and the request for interim measures. The case was removed from the CAS roll, upholding the principle that internal remedies must be exhausted before seeking arbitration. The decision underscores the importance of adhering to procedural rules in sports disputes.