The case revolves around a dispute between the Brazilian Bobsleigh and Skeleton Confederation (CBDG) and the International Bobsleigh and Skeleton Federation (FIBT) concerning the allocation of quota places for the 2010 Winter Olympics in Vancouver. The CBDG sought a quota place for the Brazilian team in the Women’s 2-man Bobsleigh event, which was denied by the FIBT. The dispute was brought before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) Ad Hoc Division, which confirmed its jurisdiction under Rule 59 of the Olympic Charter, covering disputes related to the Games. The CAS panel examined the FIBT’s qualification system, which prioritized top-ranked teams, host country representation, and continental diversity, and allowed for discretionary reallocation of unused quota positions. The panel found the FIBT’s decision to replace a withdrawing team with the next-ranked team reasonable and not arbitrary. The CBDG’s appeal was part of a broader dispute involving the Australian Olympic Committee (AOC), which successfully argued for inclusion under continental representation rules. The IOC later expanded the competition to accommodate the Irish team, but the CBDG’s request was denied. The CAS upheld the FIBT’s decision, concluding the Brazilian team did not meet qualification criteria.
The dispute also involved the Irish team’s late inclusion in the Women’s Bobsleigh World Cup after the French team withdrew. The FIBT defended its decision, stating no strict deadline existed for team confirmations, while the CBDG argued the Irish team’s late inclusion unfairly advantaged them in ranking points. The CBDG sought an interim injunction to prevent Ireland’s participation, but the request was rejected on jurisdictional grounds. The case escalated to the CAS, where the CBDG filed an application, referencing prior submissions and requesting key witnesses. The Brazilian Olympic Committee attended as an observer. The CAS panel determined its jurisdiction based on the timing of the dispute and the absence of internal FIBT remedies. The panel concluded earlier unchallenged stages of the qualification process could not be revisited in an appeal against the final decision.
The panel examined the FIBT’s authority to replace the French team with the Irish team, finding the decision justified by the Irish team’s superior performance in the 2008/2009 season. The panel rejected the CBDG’s request to direct the IOC to create an additional spot, stating it lacked authority to mandate such an action and the circumstances did not warrant an exception. The panel emphasized the importance of timely appeals and the binding nature of unchallenged decisions. Ultimately, the CAS ruled against the CBDG, upholding the FIBT’s decision and maintaining the spot allocation to the Irish team. The case highlights the complexities of Olympic qualification disputes, the CAS’s role in resolving them, and the balance between strict rules and discretionary powers of international federations.