The case revolves around a dispute between the Federación Española de Piragüismo (FEP) and the International Canoe Federation (ICF) concerning the allocation of spots for the 2012 London Olympic Games in the K2 1000m canoe kayak event. The FEP argued that two places vacated by Slovakia and Russia should be reassigned to Spanish athletes Javier Hernanz Agueria and Diego Cosgaya Noriega. The FEP had submitted requests to the ICF in August 2011 and June 2012, but these were rejected, prompting further objections in July 2012. On 28 July 2012, the FEP filed an application with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) ad hoc Division, seeking to reassign the spots and prevent the Russian National Olympic Committee from entering athletes that would displace the Spanish team.
The CAS ad hoc Division assessed its jurisdiction under Article 1 of the Ad Hoc Rules, which stipulates that disputes must arise during the Olympic Games or within the ten days preceding the Opening Ceremony. The Panel determined that the dispute had emerged much earlier, at least by June 2012, placing it outside the required timeframe. The Panel also reviewed the legal framework, including the CAS Arbitration Rules for the Olympic Games and the Swiss Private International Law Act, but concluded it lacked jurisdiction due to the timing of the dispute. The decision was rendered without a hearing, as permitted under the Ad Hoc Rules, and the application was dismissed for failing to meet jurisdictional requirements.
The dispute involved two main claims: the Place Assignment claim, which originated in August 2011 with objections raised by June 2012, and the Russian Place claim, communicated in July 2012. Both were deemed outside the ad hoc Division's jurisdiction because they did not arise within the specified period before the Opening Ceremony. The FEP argued that a letter dated 18 July 2012 brought the claim within the required timeframe, but the Panel rejected this, noting that the dispute had already been identified through earlier correspondence and complaints. The Panel emphasized that the dispute's timing is determined by when the decision was received and the surrounding facts, not by subsequent actions taken by the applicant. As a result, the Panel dismissed the application, highlighting the necessity of adhering to the temporal constraints outlined in the Ad Hoc Rules for the ad hoc Division to exercise jurisdiction. The ruling underscores the strict application of procedural timelines in resolving Olympic-related disputes.