The case revolves around a dispute between Ülker Sport and Euroleague, adjudicated by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The conflict arose when Ülker, a Turkish basketball team, refused to play a scheduled match against Maccabi Tel Aviv in Israel during the 2001/2 Euro League Competition, citing security concerns due to the volatile situation in Israel, including the Intifada. Ülker requested the match be relocated, but Euroleague declined, leading to disciplinary action after Ülker failed to attend. The central issue was whether Ülker had "suitable justification" for their absence under Euroleague regulations, which the panel clarified does not equate to force majeure but requires an objective assessment of circumstances.
Ülker argued that the security risks, player reluctance to travel, lack of insurance, and decisions by other sports organizations to relocate matches involving Israeli teams justified their refusal. Euroleague countered that they had assessed the security situation and found no objective reason to move the match, emphasizing that Ülker had not formally challenged this decision beforehand. The Euroleague disciplinary judge ruled against Ülker, imposing penalties and declaring the match forfeited, a decision upheld by the Euroleague Appeals Judge.
In the CAS appeal, Ülker reiterated their security concerns, citing external validations like UEFA's relocation of matches involving Israeli teams. Euroleague maintained that Ülker's late refusal undermined their claim of suitable justification. The CAS panel, while acknowledging the seriousness of security concerns, ruled that Ülker had not met the threshold for suitable justification under the regulations. They noted that other teams had successfully traveled to Israel during the same period without incident and that Ülker could have fielded a team, even if not at full strength. The panel compared the situation to other cases where security concerns were addressed without canceling events, such as Glasgow Rangers FC's UEFA match in Dagestan.
Although the panel expressed sympathy for Ülker and its players, they concluded that Euroleague's decision to proceed with the match was reasonable and that Ülker had failed to demonstrate sufficient justification for their absence. The panel upheld Euroleague's decision, emphasizing the importance of adhering to prearranged schedules to maintain competition integrity. The penalty, including a loss by stipulated score and a fine, was deemed appropriate, considering the "special circumstances" of the case. Ultimately, the CAS dismissed Ülker's appeal, reinforcing the principle that teams must provide compelling and timely justification for deviating from agreed schedules. The case highlights the delicate balance between safety concerns and the obligations of teams in organized sports competitions.