NEWSLETTER-2019-metin

355 SPORTS LAW prosecutions. However, the WADA appealed this agreement, since it did not concur with it. In the appeal proceeding, the parties were informed by the CAS that the advance costs were calculated as 18.000 CHF for each party. Afterwards, the respondents (the USADA and the gymnast) did not pay their portion of the advance costs, and the WADA was instructed to pay their shares within a specific period, and were informed that the appeal would be deemed withdrawn, and the proceedings would be terminated, unless payment was made. Within the deadline prescribed by the CAS, the WADA paid only half of the respondents’ advance on the costs due to an administrative error. After the WADA was informed by the CAS that only partial payment had been made, the WADA immediately paid the remaining outstanding amount of the advance costs; however the deadline for payment had already passed, and USADA and the gymnast requested termination of the proceedings due to the late payment. Even though the WADA informed the CAS that it had always intended to pay the full amount of the advance costs, the one-half payment made, the fact that the second half was paid later and that the late payment had only been rendered due to a clerical mistake, the proceeding was terminated through an order for termination by the CAS Appeals Division Presi- dent. In response to this termination order, the WADA applied to the SFT claiming a violation of its right to be heard and violation of public policy since the termination order constituted excessive formalism 5 . Admissibility of an Appeal against Termination Order of CAS The first question the Court resolved was whether or not the ter- mination order given by the CAS Appeals Division President, which is not an award of the arbitral tribunal, could be challenged before the SFT. Even though the termination order is not titled as an “arbitral award,” and Article 190 of the Private International LawAct (“PILA”) clearly mentions arbitral awards, the SFT held that a request to set aside a termination order given by the CAS may be appealed before 5 Mavromati, Despina : SFT Judgment 4A_692/2016 – WADA v. X & USADA – Excessive Formalism, http://sportlegis.com/2017/08/29/4a_6922016/ (Access date: November 2019).