The Principle of Kompetenz-Kompetenz in the Court of Arbitration for Sport
Keywords:
Principle of Kompetenz-Kompetenz, Competence, Sports-related Arbitration, Court of Arbitration for SportAbstract
The principle of Kompetenz-Kompetenz (competence-competence) in the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) is a presumption of the supreme independent judicial authority for sports-related disputes worldwide that seeks to protect the autonomy of the sports-related dispute resolution process by empowering CAS to rule on its own jurisdiction. The judiciary uses the principle of Kompetenz-Kompetenz empowers a CAS panel to rule on its own jurisdiction. This principle, generally complemented by the doctrine of separability, ensures that an arbitration clause is treated as distinct from the main contract, allowing the CAS to function even if the existence or validity of the arbitration agreement is challenged. It, thus, operates as the supreme authority in international sports arbitration. This paper explores applicability of Kompetenz-Kompetenz in global sports jurisdictions, for example, compulsory (or mandatory) arbitration in sport-related dispute resolution processes, limits on global sports arbitrability, and contexts of the arbitration agreement. It raises critical questions about the CAS’s competence. This analysis reveals a sports judicial philosophy that views the CAS as the final arbiter for sports-related disputes rather than non-binding advisory arbiter, making a significant development in sports-related arbitration jurisprudence.
References
Akhtar, Zia. “Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), Procedural Justice, and Athletes’ Appeals in Developing Countries.” Sports Law, Policy & Diplomacy Journal 1, no. 2 (2023): 63–87. https://doi.org/10.30925/slpdj.1.2.4.
Bachand, François. “Kompetenz-Kompetenz, Canadian Style.” Arbitration International 25, no. 3 (2009): 431–454. https://doi.org/10.1093/arbitration/25.3.431.
Bayle, Emmanuel. Governance, Regulation and Management of Global Sport Organisations. Abingdon, UK: Routledge, 2025. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003462118.
Bermann, George A. “The Self-Styled ‘Autonomy’ of International Arbitration.” Arbitration International 36 (2020): 221–232. https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship/2879.
Casini, Lorenzo. “Beyond Dispute: International Judicial Institutions as Lawmakers: The Making of a Lex Sportiva by the Court of Arbitration for Sport.” German Law Journal 12, no. 5 (2011): 1317–1340. https://germanlawjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/GLJ_Vol_12_No_05_Casini.pdf.
Cook, Anthony. “Kompetenz-Kompetenz: Varying Approaches and a Proposal for a Limited Form of Negative Kompetenz-Kompetenz.” Pepperdine Law Review 17 (2014): 17–34. https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/plr/vol2014/iss1/2.
Court of Arbitration for Sport. CAS 2021/A/8290 Club Menemenspor v. KF Laçi & Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA), Preliminary Arbitral Award (9 September 2022). Accessed June 14, 2026. https://www.sennferrero.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/CAS-2021-A-8290-Club-Menemenspor-v.-KF-Laci-FIFA.pdf.
Court of Arbitration for Sport. Code of Sports-related Arbitration (in force as of 1 July 2025). Lausanne: Court of Arbitration for Sport, 2025. Accessed June 14, 2026. https://www.tas-cas.org/generated/assets/pages/index/CAS_Code_2025__EN_--1-.pdf.
European Parliament and Council. Federal Act on Private International Law (PILA) of 18 December 1987 (Status as of 1 January 2026). Fedlex. Accessed June 14, 2026. https://www.fedlex.admin.ch/eli/cc/1988/1776_1776_1776/en.
Federal Supreme Court of Switzerland. Francelino da Silva Matuzalem and Real Saragossa SAD v. FIFA, Case No. 4A_558/2011, Judgment of 27 March 2012. https://jusmundi.com/en/document/decision/en-francelino-da-silva-matuzalem-and-real-saragossa-sad-v-federation-internationale-de-football-association-fifa-decision-of-the-swiss-federal-tribunal-4a-558-2011-tuesday-27th-march-2012.
Freeburn, Lloyd. “The De Facto Jurisdiction of the Court of Arbitration for Sport.” In Regulating International Sport: Power, Authority and Legitimacy, 118–154. Leiden: Brill | Nijhoff, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004379794_007.
International Olympic Committee, Association of Summer Olympic International Federations, Association of International Olympic Winter Sports Federations, and Association of National Olympic Committees. Agreement Related to the Constitution of the International Council of Arbitration for Sport (ICAS). 1994. Accessed June 14, 2026. https://arbitrationlaw.com/sites/default/files/free_pdfs/ICAS%20Agreement.pdf.
Landolt, Phillip. “The Inconvenience of Principle: Separability and Kompetenz-Kompetenz.” Journal of International Arbitration 30, no. 5 (2013): 511–530. https://doi.org/10.54648/joia2013033.
Lee, J. T.-T. “Separability, Competence-Competence and the Arbitrator’s Jurisdiction in Singapore.” Singapore Academy of Law Journal 7 (1995): 421–437. https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/575.
Maennig, Wolfgang. Governance in Sports Organizations. Hamburg Contemporary Economic Discussions No. 60. Hamburg: University of Hamburg, Faculty of Business, Economics and Social Sciences, 2017. https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/175040/1/HCED-060.pdf.
Mahapatra, Hrudananda, Rina Bhattacharjee, Anjali Mohanty, Kaustubh Bhattar, Tanjina Akhter, and Priyanka Uttam. “Evolving Legal Frameworks in Sports: Governance, Dispute Resolution, and Athlete Rights in the Global Arena.” International Journal of Environmental Sciences 11, no. 23s (2025): 1793–1800. https://theaspd.com/index.php/ijes/article/view/8662/6246.
Mavromati, Dimitrios P. “Res Judicata in Sports Disputes and Decisions Rendered by Sports Federations in Switzerland.” In Bulletin TAS/CAS Bulletin 2015/1, 40–52. Lausanne: Court of Arbitration for Sport, 2015. https://www.tas-cas.org/generated/assets/lists/c045720f-0f44-4e36-8b03-63c5dae256ee/Bulletin_2015_1_internet3.pdf.
Mitten, Matthew J. “Book Review: The Code of the Court of Arbitration for Sport: Commentary, Cases, and Materials.” Marquette Sports Law Review 26, no. 1 (2015): 265–270. https://scholarship.law.marquette.edu/sportslaw/vol26/iss1/13.
Noshadha, S., and Zhanna Kushnir. “The Doctrine of Competence-Competence (Kompetenz-Kompetenz) in International Sport Arbitration.” Science in Olympic Sport 1 (2021): 65–74. https://doi.org/10.32652/olympic2021.1_6.
Practical Law. “Swiss Supreme Court on Consent in Sports Arbitration and a Non-Signatory’s Standing to Bring a Claim before the CAS.” Thomson Reuters, April 3, 2012. Accessed June 14, 2026. https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/5-518-8075?transitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default).
Seltmann, Maximilian, and Lorenz Fiege. “Placing Athlete Rights at the Heart of Good Governance in Sport: Leveraging Ideational Power, Democratising Governance.” Sports Law, Policy & Diplomacy Journal 2, no. 2 (2024): 37–71. https://doi.org/10.30925/slpdj.2.2.3.
Swiss Civil Code (CC) of 10 December 1907. Fedlex. Accessed June 14, 2026. https://www.fedlex.admin.ch/eli/cc/24/233_245_233/en.
United Nations. United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (New York Convention, 1958). Accessed June 14, 2026. https://www.newyorkconvention.org/english.
Whitfield, H. F. “Kompetenz-Kompetenz: An Arbitral Tribunal Authority to Decide Its Jurisdiction.” Beijing Law Review 14 (2023): 1941–1953. https://doi.org/10.4236/blr.2023.144107.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 UTCC Law Journal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Articles in this journal are copyrighted by the x may be read and used for academic purposes, such as teaching, research, or citation, with proper credit given to the author and the journal.use or modification of the articles is prohibited without permission.
statements expressed in the articles are solely the opinions of the authors.
authors are fully responsible for the content and accuracy of their articles.
other reuse or republication requires permission from the journal."
