Sports lawyer Ilya Skoropashkin interpreted the CAS decision, which upheld the appeal of former national team midfielder Anatoliy Tymoshchuk against UAF.
Ilya Skoropashkin– Mr. Ilya, the first thing that comes to mind: where else can this decision be contested and is it even possible to do so?
– The decision of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) in Lausanne can only be contested in the Federal Tribunal of Switzerland. This instance reviews issues regarding the compliance of arbitration proceedings with Swiss legislation, but does not review the case on its merits. Therefore, the possibilities for appeal are extremely limited and relate only to procedural violations.
– How could this happen at all, considering the resonance, the total ban for Russia from FIFA and UEFA?
– The CAS decision is based solely on legal arguments and in accordance with procedures. If UAF made procedural errors or failed to adequately prove its position, this could have affected the outcome. Regardless of the political context, courts must ensure the protection of the rights of all parties, even in high-profile cases.
– And what now: might Tymoshchuk become even more brazen and demand compensation from UAF?
– Court costs are usually covered by the losing party. Regarding moral compensation… A statute of limitations applies in football, which is two years. If a party does not claim moral damages within this period, the possibility to demand compensation is lost after it ends.
– A lost court case often means compensation for moral and material damages. Is it possible under certain circumstances, excuse my non-legally precise question, for UAF to go bankrupt?
– The scenario of UAF's bankruptcy in this case is very unlikely.
– It’s a pity, but there are plenty of turncoats and traitors among Ukrainian footballers. Could other individuals follow Tymoshchuk and file in Lausanne?
– Each case must meet specific deadlines for filing an appeal. Usually, regulations from bodies of football justice, like UAF, specify a specific period for submitting an appeal. In the case of CAS, the standard deadline for filing an appeal is 21 days from the receipt of the decision being appealed. If the deadline is missed, even with convincing arguments, the appeal will be deemed inadmissible.
Moreover, CAS considers each case individually, even if they are similar in circumstances. This means that the outcome of one case does not create an automatic precedent guaranteeing a similar outcome for others. This case creates a precedent only in a societal sense — others may feel confident in their ability to appeal decisions from football justice bodies. But legally, this does not mean automatic recognition of similar complaints. Each case will be assessed based on its unique circumstances.
– How should UAF representatives behave now?
– Currently, it is key for UAF to analyze the reasons for the loss in this case to avoid similar precedents. This is an important lesson for UAF in terms of legal preparation for high-profile cases. It is crucial to ensure proper documentation of decisions and procedures, as well as to involve highly qualified lawyers to present the position at the international level.
This CAS decision has not only a legal but also a reputational component, so it is necessary to work on increasing trust in the decisions of bodies of football justice in Ukraine.
