U ovom tekstu autori su pokušali cjelovito prikazati slučaj poznat kao Đoković case, vjerojatno najveći pravni skandal u posljednje vrijeme, skandal koji je završio deportiranjem najboljeg svjetskog ...tenisača Novaka Đokovića iz Australije gdje je došao (necijepljen) kako bi po deseti put pobijedio na Australian Openu i tme postao prvi tenisač u povijesti sa 21 Grand Slam titulom (i još tko zna koliko u budućnosti). Ulazna australska viza dva je puta poništena; prvo poništenje „sanirao“ je sud svojom odlukom prema kojoj je poništenje bilo nezakonito, drugo poništenje (ono prepoznato kao diskrecijska ovlast ministra) također se pokušalo „sanirati“ putem suda, ovaj put bez uspjeha, ali uz tvrdnju da se kod takve (diskrecijske) ovlasti provjerava samo je li odluka koju je donio australski ministar imigracije „iracionalna ili pravno nerazumna“. Zaključak je da deportacija nije bila protupravna, ali je modus operandi državnih vlasti (bez obzira na razinu) prava pravna katastrofa uslijed čega je Novak Đoković zasigurno bio izložen potpuno nepotrebnom šikaniranju i tretiranju kao da je počinio neko od težih kaznenih djela.
In this text, the authors try to present the case known as the Djokovic case, probably
the biggest legal scandal in recent times, a scandal that ended with the deportation of the
world’s best tennis player Novak Djokovic from Australia, where he came (unvaccinated)
to win the Australian Open for the tenth time and to became the first tennis player in
history with 21 Grand slam titles (and who knows how many more in the future). The
Australian entry visa was annulled twice, the first annulment was “repaired” by a court
ruling that the annulment was illegal, the second annulment (recognized as a minister’s
discretion) was also tried to be “repaired” by a court, this time without success but with
the claim that such (discretionary) powers only check whether a decision made by the
Australian Minister of Immigration is “irrational or legally unreasonable”. The conclusion
is that the deportation was not illegal, but the modus operandi of the state authorities
(regardless of the level) is a real legal catastrophe, as a result of which Novak Djokovic
was certainly exposed to completely unnecessary harassment and treatment as if he had
committed one of the most serious crimes.
Ovaj radi bavi se raznim aspektima ugovora kojima stranke ugovaraju nadležnost Arbitražnog suda za sport za odlučivanje u njihovoj pravnoj stvari, kao i pojavnim oblicima arbitražnih ugovora – kako ...je propisano, kakav je stav u svojim odlukama zauzeo CAS i kako se o valjanosti takvih ugovora izjasnio Švicarski federalni sud u nekoliko svojih najrelevantnijih odluka. Namjera ovog rada jest ukazati na probleme s kojima se stranke pro futuro mogu susresti, uvođenjem subjektivnih interpretativnih kategorija (od strane tribunala) kao elemenata u strogo formalni zakonski akt, te ponuditi određene alternative nekim postupovnim principima ustanovljenima kroz praksu Švicarskog federalnog suda.
This paper deals with the various aspects of contracts by which the parties agree on jurisdiction of the Court of Arbitration for Sport to decide their legal matter, as well as with the various manifestations of arbitration agreements - as prescribed by law; in regards to the CAS legal reasoning and the Swiss federal courts decision on the validity of such contracts in few of its most relevant cases. The purpose of this paper is to highlight the problems that parties may face pro futuro by introducing subjective interpretative categories (by tribunals) as elements in a strictly formal legal act, and to offer certain alternatives to some procedural principles established through the case law of the Swiss Federal Court.
PDF