The case involves a legal dispute between Beşiktaş Jimnastik Kulübü, a Turkish basketball club, and Allen Iverson, a former professional basketball player, concerning an employment contract for the 2010-2011 season. The conflict arose when Iverson suffered a leg injury and sought medical treatment in the U.S., leading Beşiktaş to suspend payments, claiming the injury predated the contract and was unrelated to sports. Iverson contested this, leading to arbitration before the Basketball Arbitral Tribunal (BAT), which ruled in his favor, ordering Beşiktaş to pay damages and arbitration costs. Beşiktaş appealed the BAT decision to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), arguing the decision was unlawful and that Iverson acted in bad faith. The CAS examined its jurisdiction under Article R47 of the CAS Code and Article 186 of the Swiss Private International Law Act (PILA), which allows arbitral tribunals to rule on their own competence.
Beşiktaş sought to annul the BAT decision and stay its execution, fearing difficulties in recovering payments if the appeal succeeded. Iverson countered that the appeal was filed in bad faith and aimed at delaying payment, asserting he had fulfilled his contractual obligations. He also challenged CAS jurisdiction, arguing the BAT award was final and binding and that the appeal was filed outside the statutory time limit. The CAS Panel reviewed the contractual arbitration clause and procedural history, including the transition from the FIBA Arbitral Tribunal (FAT) to the BAT. The Panel determined that the applicable FIBA regulations at the time of the contract did not provide for an appeal to the CAS, as the 2010 FIBA Arbitration Rules, unlike the 2009 edition, explicitly stated BAT awards were final.
The Panel concluded that neither the parties’ agreement nor the FIBA regulations permitted an appeal to the CAS, rendering the BAT decision final and binding. Consequently, the CAS dismissed Beşiktaş’s appeal, declaring it had no jurisdiction to adjudicate the dispute. The case underscores the importance of clear arbitration clauses in contracts and the jurisdictional criteria for CAS appeals, while also highlighting the finality of BAT awards under the applicable FIBA regulations. The outcome reaffirmed the principle that arbitral decisions are binding unless expressly provided otherwise by the governing rules or agreements.