The case revolves around the expulsion of the Croatian Golf Federation (CGF) by the European Golf Association (EGA) in 2010, a decision later challenged by the CGF before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The dispute began when the Zagreb City Office of General Administration declared in February 2009 that the CGF had ceased operations due to bankruptcy, a claim the CGF contested through legal appeals. The EGA proposed expelling the CGF at its 2009 Annual General Meeting (AGM), citing the federation's inability to manage golf activities in Croatia under bankruptcy. The CGF argued against expulsion, leading the EGA to postpone the decision to 2010, requesting further proof of the CGF's legal status. By July 2010, the CGF informed the EGA that bankruptcy proceedings had ended, but the EGA proceeded with expulsion in October 2010.
The CAS panel examined whether the expulsion was justified under the EGA Constitution, particularly Article 16(3), which permits expulsion for constitutional violations. The panel raised concerns about due process, emphasizing the fundamental right to be heard, a principle upheld in CAS jurisprudence. It found that the EGA's decision-making process violated this right, as the CGF was not given adequate opportunity to defend itself. The panel rejected the argument that de novo proceedings before CAS could remedy this violation, noting that the expulsion decision was largely political and discretionary, not purely legal. It concluded that procedural violations could only be overlooked in rare cases where they had no bearing on the outcome, which was not applicable here.
The panel also scrutinized the EGA's reliance on the CGF's bankruptcy, questioning whether this alone justified expulsion. It noted that the CGF had resolved its bankruptcy by mid-2010, yet the EGA proceeded with expulsion without adequately considering this development. The panel underscored that federations must respect procedural fairness, especially in severe measures like expulsion, and found the EGA's process deficient. The decision highlights the limits of CAS's review powers, as it cannot substitute its judgment for the political discretion of an association's members.
The EGA's expulsion resolution was based on documents from Croatian authorities, including a letter from the Croatian Olympic Committee (COC) terminating the CGF's membership and admitting the Croatian Golf Association (HGU) as an associate member. The EGA also cited a letter from the Croatian Ministry of Science, Education, and Sport supporting the COC's efforts to promote golf. However, the panel found these reasons insufficient to justify expulsion under the EGA Constitution. It criticized the EGA for failing to provide the CGF with the documents or adequate notice before the vote, violating the CGF's right to be heard.
The panel ruled in favor of the CGF, overturning the expulsion decision. It emphasized the importance of due process in disciplinary actions by sports federations, noting that the CGF's right to defend itself was fundamentally violated. The case underscores the necessity for transparency, procedural fairness, and adherence to constitutional provisions in such decisions. The panel's ruling reaffirmed that federations must uphold fundamental principles of justice, even in internal disciplinary actions, to ensure fair and lawful outcomes.