The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) issued a ruling on October 26, 2018, in a dispute between the Pan-American Team Handball Federation (PATHF) and the International Handball Federation (IHF). The case centered on the IHF's decision to split the PATHF into two separate confederations, which was approved by the IHF Congress in November 2017. The PATHF challenged the legality of this decision, arguing procedural violations and improper delegation of authority. The CAS panel, composed of Prof. Martin Schimke, Mr. Diego Ferrari, and Mr. Pierre Muller, examined several legal issues, including the admissibility of evidence, proper notice requirements under Swiss law, and the validity of the IHF Congress's decision.
The panel found that the IHF failed to provide adequate notice of the motion to split the PATHF, violating Article 67(3) of the Swiss Civil Code, which requires clear agenda items to allow members to prepare for deliberation. Although the motion was included in the Congress agenda, its content was insufficiently detailed, leaving delegates unprepared. The panel also ruled that the IHF Congress improperly delegated its authority to amend statutes to the IHF Council, a power reserved exclusively for the Congress under Swiss law. This delegation lacked a statutory basis and undermined the Congress's sovereignty over statutory changes.
The panel further noted procedural irregularities during the Congress, including the denial of discussion opportunities for delegates before the vote. Witnesses testified that they were caught off guard by the amended motion and were unable to deliberate. The panel emphasized that such significant decisions require transparency and due process, which were lacking in this case. Despite the IHF's arguments that the motion was properly submitted and followed statutory procedures, the panel concluded that the Congress's decision was null and void due to severe procedural defects.
The PATHF also contested the vote count, alleging discrepancies between the Congress minutes and scrutineers' notes. While the panel acknowledged these inconsistencies, it deemed them irrelevant to the core legal issue of improper delegation and procedural unfairness. The panel dismissed the PATHF's request for reimbursement of costs from prior proceedings, as this fell outside its jurisdiction.
In its final ruling, the CAS partially upheld the PATHF's appeal, annulling the IHF Arbitration Tribunal's decision of May 1, 2018, and declaring the IHF Congress's November 11, 2017, decision null and void. The ruling underscored the importance of procedural correctness and adherence to statutory requirements in international sports governance. The case highlighted tensions between the IHF and PATHF over governance, financial accountability, and the future of handball development in the Pan-American region. The CAS's decision reinforced the principle that significant statutory changes must be made with proper notice, deliberation, and respect for the supreme authority of the general assembly.