The case centers on Russian athletes Tatyana Borodulina, Pavel Kulizhnikov, Alexander Loginov, Irina Starykh, Dimitry Vassiliev, and Denis Yuskov, who challenged their exclusion from the 2018 Pyeongchang Winter Olympics by the International Olympic Committee (IOC). The dispute stemmed from the IOC's suspension of the Russian Olympic Committee on December 5, 2017, and its decision to invite individual Russian athletes under strict anti-doping conditions. The applicants, not included in the final list, filed a request for provisional measures with a Swiss court on January 22, 2018, seeking an order to compel the IOC to invite them. They argued their exclusion was unjust, while the IOC maintained the decision was based on independent criteria, including anti-doping history. On February 7, 2018, the athletes filed an application with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) Ad Hoc Division, seeking eligibility. The IOC contested the admissibility, arguing the dispute arose before the ten-day period preceding the Opening Ceremony, placing it outside the CAS Ad Hoc Division's jurisdiction.
The CAS panel, composed of Mohamed Abdel Raouf, Laurence Boisson de Chazournes, and Jinwon Park, examined whether the dispute fell within the Ad Hoc Division's temporal jurisdiction. Referencing the International Court of Justice’s definition of a dispute, the panel concluded the disagreement arose on January 19, 2018, when the athletes learned of their non-inclusion, which was outside the jurisdictional window. The panel ruled on February 8, 2018, that it lacked jurisdiction and dismissed the athletes' request for relief, including eligibility and cost contributions. The decision highlights the strict jurisdictional limits of the CAS Ad Hoc Division and the complexities of athlete eligibility disputes in international sports.
The athletes claimed their dispute arose on February 2, 2018, when the IOC communicated its decision, but the panel determined the actual date was January 19, 2018, when the IOC sent the exclusion list to the Russian Olympic Committee. The panel noted the athletes' prior actions, including their request for provisional measures, as evidence the dispute predated the ten-day window. The February 2 communication was deemed a reference to earlier submissions, not a formal decision. The final award, issued on February 9, 2018, reiterated the lack of jurisdiction, emphasizing the importance of timely legal challenges in sports disputes. The case underscores the procedural rigor and jurisdictional boundaries governing athlete eligibility appeals in international competitions.