TAS - CAS 3148 de 2013

Tribunal Arbitral du Sport Court of Arbitration for Sport Arbitration CAS 2013/A/3148 Pan-American Amateur Sambo Federation (PAASF) v. Fédération Internationale Amateur de Sambo (FIAS) & Vasily Shestakov, award of 5 September 2014

Panel: Prof. Petros Mavroidis (Switzerland), President; Mr Michele Bernasconi (Switzerland); Prof.

Denis Oswald (Switzerland) Sambo Governance Conditions for production of new evidence Interpretation of an arbitration agreement Notion of appealable decision Timelimit under Article 75 Swiss Civil Code Timelimit to challenge decisions that are null and void

1. Pursuant to Article R56 para. 1 of the CAS Code, once the appeal brief has been filed, the President of the Panel may authorize the Appellant to supplement it only on the basis of “exceptional circumstances”. The fact that evidence is in the hands of the representatives of a party (and difficult to obtain by the lawyer representing that party) which are located all over the world does not amount to “exceptional circumstances”.

2. According to the Swiss Supreme Court an intent by the parties to waive the right to bring their claims before ordinary courts should not be assumed lightly and therefore arbitration agreements are to be interpreted restrictively. However, where such intent has been established, an arbitration clause must be interpreted according to the general rules of interpretation, including the general rules for interpretation of contracts. In particular, the arbitration clause must be interpreted on the basis of the principle of good faith. The statements of the parties are to be interpreted as they could and should be understood on the basis of their wording and the context as well as under the overall circumstances. The requirement of good faith tends to give the preference to a more objective approach. The emphasis is not so much on what a party may have meant but on how a reasonable man would have understood his declaration.

3. According to established CAS jurisprudence the characteristic features of an appealable

decision in the meaning of Article R47 para. 1 of the CAS Code are as follows: a) the form of the communication has no relevance to determine whether there exists a decision or not; b) in principle, for a communication to be a decision, this communication must contain a ruling, whereby the body issuing the decision intends to affect the legal situation of the addressee of the decision or other parties; c) a decision is a unilateral act, sent to one or more determined recipients and is intended to produce legal effects; d) an appealable decision of a sport association or federation is normally a communication of the association directed to a party and based on an “animus CAS 2013/A/3148 2 PAASF v. FIAS & Vasily Shestakov, award of 5 September 2014 decidendi”, i.e. an intention of a body of the association to decide on a matter.

4. According to Article 75 Swiss Civil Code (“CC”), an appeal against a resolution which infringes the law or the articles of association can be challenged within one month of learning thereof. This time limit is generally considered to be peremptory and cannot be amended. The dies a quo of the time limit for the filing of the appeal is not when the decision has been made, but when the party appealing the decision has become aware of the decision. It is not necessary that the decision be formally notified to him by the decision-making body; it is sufficient if the appellant knows of the decision.

5. Under Swiss association law, decisions which are null and void are challengeable at any point in time irrespective of the 21-day time limit of Article R49 of the CAS Code and of the one-month time limit of Article 75 CC. However, the situation is different depending on whether the decision is vitiated by procedural flaws or by manifest errors of law. In the first case, the decision is only voidable and must be challenged within the applicable time limit. In the second case, the decision is null and void and can be contested at any

time. However the infringement of substantive law must be particularly serious. A decision is only voidable when it does not respect the Statutes.

I. INTRODUCTION

1. The appeal is brought against “decisions of the Fédération Internationale Amateur de Sambo (“FIAS”) and its President Vasily Shestakov (“Shestakov”) dated 23 March 2013”. The Pan-American Amateur Sambo Federation (“PAASF” or “Appellant”) claims that the said decisions were taken in an illegal manner and are the result of a long-term strategy of individuals aiming a) to dismantle the PAASF of all its members; b) to install the Federación Panamericana de Sambo (“FEPAS”) in place of the PAASF, which it occupied since 2005; and c) to replace the PAASF President, Mr Yakov (“Jack”) Kogan (hereinafter “Jack Kogan”) with the FEPAS President, Mr Juan Pablo Melo, as a member of the FIAS Executive Committee.

2. As an initial matter, the Fédération Internationale de Sambo (previously named “Fédération Internationale Amateur de Sambo”) (“FIAS”) and Mr Vasily Shestakov (“Mr Shestakov” or “Second Respondent”) (collectively, the “Respondents”) challenge the jurisdiction of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (“CAS”) to hear the case on the grounds that a) there is no valid arbitration agreement binding the Parties; b) the Appellant has no standing to appeal; c) the internal remedies have not been exhausted; d) the appeal was not timely filed insofar as it is directed against the recognition of the FEPAS as the continental federation for the PanAmerican Region and the appointment of Mr Juan Pablo Melo as a member of the FIAS Executive Committee. They furthermore claim that the administration of the FIAS is flawless and well beyond any reproach.

CAS 2013/A/3148 3

PAASF v. FIAS & Vasily Shestakov,

award of 5 September 2014

3. With the Parties’ agreement, the Panel chose to bifurcate the proceedings and to decide on the CAS jurisdiction as a preliminary matter.

II. THE PARTIES

4. The Appellant is an association under United States law and has its registered office in New Jersey, United States of America. From 2005 until November 2011, it has been the sole continental union representing the national Sambo federations of the American continent within the FIAS. It claims to act in the present proceedings on its own behalf, as well as on behalf of “the National SAMBO Federations of Canada, United States of America, Mexico, Dominican

Republic, Panama and Venezuela”.

5. The First Respondent is an association under Swiss law and has its registered office in Lausanne, Switzerland. The FIAS is the international federation governing Sambo, a Russian martial art and combat sport. Pursuant to Article 1.3 of its Statutes, “FIAS is composed of National SAMBO Federations, representing SAMBO sport in their respective countries and officially recognized by the National Olympic Committee (NOC) and/or the highest Sports authorities of the corresponding country (in the absence of such bodies state registration is sufficient)”. According to Article 4.2 of the FIAS Statutes, “Each country shall be represented by only One National Federation”.

6. Mr Shestakov was elected President of the FIAS in November 2009 and has held that position since then.

III. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

7. Below is a summary of the relevant facts and allegations based on the Parties’ written and oral submissions, pleadings, and evidence adduced. References to additional facts and allegations found in the Parties’ written and oral submissions, pleadings, and evidence will be made, where relevant, in connection with the legal analysis that follows. While the Panel has considered all the facts, allegations, legal arguments, and evidence submitted by the Parties in the present

proceedings, it refers in its Award only to the submissions and evidence it deems necessary to explain its reasoning.

III.1 THE BUENOS AIRES MEETING OF 29 OCTOBER 2011

8. On 29 October 2011, the Presidents of a number of national Sambo federations of the PanAmerican Region met in Buenos Aires, Argentina, and decided to form a new continental federation under the name of “Federación Panamericana de Sambo (FEPAS)”.

9. The minutes of the meeting (as translated from Spanish into English by the Respondents) indicate in relevant part the following:  Mr Tikhomirov Mikhail Ivanovich, the honorary President of the FIAS, attended the meeting “as a representative of FIAS, to ensure that the full protocol for creating the Pan-American Federation in accordance with the statutes of FIAS was followed”.

CAS 2013/A/3148 4

PAASF v. FIAS & Vasily Shestakov, award of 5 September 2014  Were also present:

1. Franco Bulnes (CHI)

2. Jonny Chavez Atiaga (PER)

3. Vito Leone (ECU)

4. Pablo Solis (URU)

5. Carlos Maia (BRA)

6. Marco Videla (PAR)

7. Antonia Ramirez Rebollar (MEX)

8. Omar Lopera (COL)

9. Juan Pablo Melo (ARG)

10. Eduardo Flors Allendes (ARG)

11. Anton Igline (ARG)  The attendees unanimously approved the final version of the FEPAS Statutes and Mr Juan Pablo Melo was elected President.  The various FEPAS commissions and committees were then appointed.

III.2 THE FIAS ANNUAL CONGRESS IN VILNIUS, LITHUANIA – 10 NOVEMBER 2011

10. The FIAS convened its members to an ordinary Congress, which took place in Vilnius,

Lithuania, on 10 November 2011. 11. 49 representatives of national Sambo federations affiliated to the FIAS were present and decided namely the following:  Acceptance of the affiliation of several new national federations as members of the FIAS.  The FEPAS was recognized as the sole continental union representing the national Sambo federations of the Pan-American continent within the FIAS.  “To take into consideration the information and approve the decision of the Extraordinary Congress of the National SAMBO federations of Pan-American continent. In accordance with the decision, (…) Mr. Juan Pablo Melo shall be included into the FIAS Executive [Committee] instead of the previous head of Pan-American federation”.; i.e. Mr Jack Kogan, the PAASF President.

12. In relation with the above decisions, it is worth bearing in mind the following provisions of the FIAS Statutes:  Article 5.1, first sentence: “National SAMBO Federations, affiliated to FIAS and representing the countries of the same continent, have the right to establish their own Continental Federations”.  Article 5.2: “The Presidents of Continental Federations shall be members of the Executive Committee of FIAS as Vice-Presidents”.

13. It is undisputed that, according to the FIAS Statutes, there shall be only one continental federation per continent (See Statement of Appeal, para. 2; Appeal Brief, para. 3 and Answer, CAS 2013/A/3148 5

PAASF v. FIAS & Vasily Shestakov, award of 5 September 2014 para. 53). This is furthermore confirmed by the French version of Article 5.1 of the FIAS Statutes (“Sur un continent une seule fédération continentale peut être établie et reconnue par le FIAS”).

III.3 THE VARIOUS ACTIONS CARRIED OUT ON BEHALF OF THE PAASF FOLLOWING THE

FIAS ANNUAL CONGRESS MEETING IN VILNIUS

14. Between October 2011 and March 2013, “on behalf of PAASF, Mr. Kogan sent at least eight letters to Mr. Shestakov and the FIAS Executive Committee members (…) to dispute FIAS’ decision to recognize: (1) Mr. Melo’s illegally formed Continental Federation FEPAS, and (2) Mr. Melo as President of the illegally formed and recognized Continental Federation FEPAS, while informing the FIAS President and Executive Committee that their actions violate the FIAS/PAASF Statutes, and the governing law”.

15. Mr Jack Kogan also argued that the FEPAS had actually never been validly constituted under the laws of Colombia, where it has its registered office, an assertion contested by the

Respondents.

16. Mr Jack Kogan’s written interventions to the FIAS remained unanswered.

III.4 THE FEPAS ANNUAL CONGRESS IN CALI, COLOMBIA – 26 SEPTEMBER 2012

17. On 26 September 2012, the FEPAS held its annual Congress in Cali, Colombia.

18. The minutes of the meeting indicate the following:  Duly authorised representatives of the following FEPAS members attended the meeting:

1. Argentina

2. Barbados

3. Chile

4. Colombia

5. Dominican Republic

6. Ecuador

7. Honduras

8. Mexico

9. Panama

10. Salvador

11. Trinidad and Tobago

12. Uruguay  Representatives of Canada, Venezuela and of the United States of America were present as observers without voting rights as they failed to meet the formal requirements embedded in the FEPAS Statutes.  Mr Andrey Moshanov, a FIAS Representative, also attended the meeting as an observer.  Para. 12 of the minutes was translated from Spanish into English by the Respondents and reads in pertinent part: CAS 2013/A/3148 6

PAASF v. FIAS & Vasily Shestakov, award of 5 September 2014 “The situation regarding development of SAMBO in the USA (United States of America) was discussed and there was an exchange of interactions with USA President Jack Kogan. Mikhail Kozitskiy and Leonid Poliakov spoke and reported on their problems in working with Jack Kogan. Panama Sambo Federation representative Cesar Chu made a motion to impose disciplinary sanctions against the US Sambo Federation and discuss this problem at the FIAS Congress. FEPAS President Juan Pablo Melo asked the delegates to be more patient and constructive and not allow action that would lead us to separation and confrontation”.

III.5 THE FIAS AD HOC COMMISSION ON ORGANISATION ISSUES WITHIN THE PANAMERICAN REGION

19. In view of the conflicting situation between the competing continental federations for the Pan-American Region, the FIAS Executive Committee established an “Ad hoc commission on organisation issues within Pan-American”. The three members of this commission, Mr Dalil Skalli

(Chairman, FIAS Vice-president and member of the FIAS Executive Committee), Mr Sergey Eliseev (FIAS Vice-president and member of the FIAS Executive Committee), and Mr Roberto Ferraris (FIAS General Secretary and member of the FIAS Executive Committee) held a “skype conference” on 14 January 2013 during which they “unanimously approved the draft of the strategy to be applied with regards to the situation in Pan-American Sambo, as below

1. Continental entities (Continental Unions, Continental Federations, Continental Confederations, etc), despite the fact that they are formed by the National Sambo Federations, are not the members of FIAS.

2. Therefore, continental entities may have any legal form or shape, but are here exclusively to coordinate development of SAMBO.

3. FIAS has no legal rights to limit and/or prevent foundation of such nongovernmental organizations; has no legal rights to apply any limitative measures and/or sanctions against these National

Federations, which expressed the will to join and/or be part of them.

4. FIAS has the exclusive right to organize and manage the overall development and promotion of SAMBO on any and every Continent, as the recognized International Governing Body for SAMBO in the World.

5. FIAS has the exclusive right to approve the only one Continental organization of such kind and to delegate the role to coordinate the development of SAMBO in the Pan-American Continent to this organization on behalf of FIAS.

6. With regards to the current situation when there are two organizations willing to take up the leading role in the development of SAMBO on the continent (PAASF, President J. Kogan and FEPAS, President J. Melo) FIAS has to nominate one of them to serve as the FIAS representative on the continent; decision should be based on the assessment of their capacity and potential.

With respect to all mentioned above, the Commission decided  To give all due respect to both organizations and recognize their contribution and achievements in CAS 2013/A/3148 7 PAASF v. FIAS & Vasily Shestakov, award of 5 September 2014 promotion and development of SAMBO in America, and  To advise both organizations to merge into one and united continental organization by way of calling the Foundation Congress under the supervision from D. Scalli as Chairman of the “FIAS Ad Hoc Commission on Organizational Issues within Pan-America”. The FIAS Commission on Organizational Issues within Pan-America will task FIAS General Secretary N. Lentz to include this matter into the agenda of the Executive [Committee] Meeting when appropriate to be discussed further”.

III.6 THE PAASF CONGRESS MEETING IN PUNTA CANA, DOMINICAN REPUBLIC – 3 MARCH

2013

20. On 28 February 2013, the legal counsel of the PAASF wrote to the FIAS President (Mr Vasily Shestakov), its Secretary General (Mr Nikolay Lents) and its 1st Vice-President (Mr Andrey

Kliamko) to recall his client’s major accomplishments for Sambo and to complain about (a) the unlawful interference of the FIAS with the rights of the Pan-American national federations to freely form their own continental federation, as well as (b) the recognition by the FIAS of the FEPAS in contravention of its own Statutes. In particular, he emphasized that the FEPAS was not legally formed nor was Mr Juan Pablo Melo properly elected to serve as President of this illegitimate continental federation. In this context, he demanded the FIAS to restore the PAASF as the lawful FIAS recognized continental Sambo federation for the Pan-American Region and that the “seat previously held by Juan Pablo Melo Bertoli on the FIAS Executive Committee be vacated and that the lawfully elected Pan-American SAMBO Federation President be seated on the FIAS Executive Board in that vacated position immediately, in accordance with the Statutes and past practice”. The FIAS was requested to address the claims of the PAASF no later than 15 March 2013.

21. On 3 March 2013, the PAASF Congress meeting took place in Punta Cana, Dominican Republic, which was attended by the following individuals:

“Kogan, Jack - PAASF President Rudman, David - PAASF EC Member Logvin, Vitaly - Mexico NSF President Pirela Victor - Venezuela NSF President Diaz Jesse - Venezuela NSF Secretary General Zaslavsky, Vitaly - USA NSF Secretary General Rapoport, Kirill - USA NSF EC Member La Mont, Alfredo - USA NSF EC Member Sokolovski, Victor - Canada NSF President Novae, Irina - Canada NSF Vice President Monsanto, Leonardo - Dominican Republic NSF President Romero, Elisio - Dominican Republic NSF Secretary General Garcia De La Cruz, Osvaldo - Dominican Republic NSF EC Member Chu, Cesar - Panama NSF President /by proxy”.

CAS 2013/A/3148 8

PAASF v. FIAS & Vasily Shestakov, award of 5 September 2014

22. In an undated statement sent to the members of the FIAS Executive Committee and contrary to what is indicated in the minutes of the PAASF Congress meeting, Mr Cesar Chu affirmed that his national federation was neither present nor represented at this meeting.

23. According to the PAASF, the individuals mentioned above represented 6 of the 7 recognized National Federations of the Pan-American Region.

24. During this meeting, Mr Jack Kogan was re-elected for another four-year term as the PAASF

President.

25. The participants to the Congress meeting discussed a long list of items with regard to the illicit activities of some of the FIAS officials, their improper intrusion in the affairs of national and/or continental federations, their questionable financial actions, as well as the unethical process that led to the admission of new federation members, which actually do not really exist. In this context, they unanimously approved “to support a letter from PAASF to CAS to force further investigation on the subject of violations by FIAS leadership” and “to support a letter to FIAS Executive Committee to demand immediate and voluntary resignation of FIAS President Mr V. Shestakov”.

26. On 4 March 2013, the PAASF sent an undated letter to Mr Vasily Shestakov, signed by Mr Jack Kogan, Mr Vitaly Logvin, Mr Victor Pirela, Mr Victor Sokolovski, and Mr Leonardo Monsanto asking for his “immediate voluntarily resignation as the President of FIAS, to save our Sport and our Federation from further embarrassment”.

27. On 14 March 2013, in an undated letter, exclusively signed by Mr Jack Kogan and sent to Mr Vasily Shestakov, the PAASF expressed its “strongest protest against the actions of Andrew Moshanov and his announcement of the designation of the host for the 2014 Pan American Championships”.

Mr Jack Kogan demanded “a clarification to know under whose direction and authority is Mr. Moshanov

acting; (…) if the Executive Committee or what other organ of FIAS authorized this intromission into the affairs of a continental federation; (…) what funds are being utilized to pay for these actions”. An answer was requested from Mr Shestakov on or before 15 March 2013.

28. The PAASF legal counsel’s letter of 28 February 2013, as well as all other letters sent by Mr Jack Kogan to the FIAS, remained unanswered. Consequently, on 19 March 2013, the FIAS was informed that the PAASF was about to “pursue all appropriate and more formal legal options, including proceeding before the appropriate legal bodies in Switzerland to obtain relief from FIAS’ misconduct”.

III.7 THE FIAS CONGRESS MEETING IN MINSK, BELARUS – 7 NOVEMBER 2012

29. On 7 November 2012, the FIAS held its annual Congress meeting in Minsk, Belarus.

According to the minutes of the meeting, the conflicting situation between the PAASF, the FIAS and/or the FEPAS was not incorporated in the agenda nor discussed by the attending members.

CAS 2013/A/3148 9

PAASF v. FIAS & Vasily Shestakov, award of 5 September 2014

III.8 THE FIAS EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING IN MOSCOW, RUSSIA – 22 MARCH 2013

30. On 5 March 2013, the FIAS convened its Executive Committee members to a meeting to be held on 22 March 2013. On the agenda was “1) Re.: the FIAS Executive Board members; 2) Re.: the FIAS Calendar (Universiade in Kazan City 2013, Sport Accord World Combat Games in St.- Petersburg in 2013, etc); 3) Miscellaneous”. The invitation specified that the “issues to be put onto the FIAS EB meeting Agenda (if any) shall be forwarded to the FIAS Administration (…) before the 10th of

March 2013”.

31. By e-mail dated 8 March 2013, Mr Jack Kogan asked the following items to be included to the agenda of the upcoming FIAS Executive Committee meeting:  Restore the PAASF as the lawful FIAS continental Sambo federation for the PanAmerican Region;  Rescind FIAS recognition of the illegally formed FEPAS;  “We demand that the seat previously held by Juan Pablo Melo Bertoli on the FIAS Executive Committee be vacated and that the lawfully elected Pan-American SAMBO Federation President be seated on the FIAS Executive Board in that vacated position immediately, in accordance with the Statutes and past practice”.

32. In spite of the fact that he was duly invited to the FIAS Executive Committee meeting of 22

March 2013 and that his attendance expenses were paid for by the FIAS, Mr Jack Kogan was “formally excluded” from joining the meeting.

33. According to the minutes of the meeting, the members of the FIAS Executive Committee did not address any of the issues (a) raised in Mr Jack Kogan’s email of 8 March 2013 or (b) associated with the situation between the competing continental federations for the PanAmerican Region.

34. As far as the first item of the agenda is concerned (“the FIAS Executive Board members”), the members of the FIAS Executive Committee decided “1. To revoke the powers from Nikolay Lentz as of FIAS General Secretary and to terminate his responsibilities till the next FIAS Congress due to the professional misconduct of his duties and responsibilities. 2. To revoke the powers from Mikhail Shultz as of FIAS Vice-President and to terminate his responsibilities till the next FIAS Congress due to the actions of discrediting nature for FIAS. 3. To revoke the powers from David Rudman as of FIAS 1st Vice-President and to terminate his responsibilities till the next FIAS Congress due to the actions of discrediting nature for FIAS. 4. To revoke the powers from Fazliddin Pulatov as of FIAS Vice-President and terminate his

responsibilities till the next FIAS Congress due to the loss of his legitimate status and the actions of discrediting nature for FIAS”.

35. The other decisions taken were related to the organisation and management of FIAS activities as well as the overall development of Sambo as a sport.

CAS 2013/A/3148 10

PAASF v. FIAS & Vasily Shestakov, award of 5 September 2014

III.9 THE EVENTS FOLLOWING THE FIAS EXECUTIVE MEETING IN MOSCOW

36. On 14 June 2013, the “FIAS Ad Hoc Commission on organizational issues of SAMBO development within Pan American continent” held a conciliatory meeting with the goal to terminate the conflict in the Pan-American Region. According to the Respondents “25 federations of this region were heard. Mr Kogan was invited but decided not to attend that meeting”. The Appellant does not dispute this. According to the minutes of the meeting, it was decided:  to support the decision of the FIAS Congress of 10 November 2011 to recognize the FEPAS as the sole continental union representing the national Sambo federations of the Pan-American continent within the FIAS;  to support the FIAS in the present proceedings before the CAS;  “to declare the actions of the American Amateur SAMBO Federation and its president, Yakov Kogan, violating the interests of FIAS and causing reputational damage as to FIAS and SAMBO in general. Make a point of the extreme negative situation connected to the arrest of two members of the American Amateur SAMBO Federation headed by Yakov Kogan on suspicion of involvement of two members of the PAASF Executive Committee in illegal activities on laundering of money, obtained through crime, as well as involving to the work with the federation of Alfredo LaMont who was a complicit in a big corruptive scandal in 2002 connected with the definition of the city host for

the Olympic Games 2002; to file a petition to the FIAS Executive Committee requesting the expulsion of the American Amateur Sambo Federation from among the FIAS members at the next FIAS Congress 2013”.

37. Also on 14 June 2013, the FEPAS held its annual Congress. Although non-member federations were invited and present, Mr Jack Kogan decided not to attend. The minutes of the meeting indicate the following:  Mr Juan Pablo Melo voluntarily submitted his resignation as FEPAS President.

Nevertheless, he was elected as FEPAS 1st Vice-President.  Mr Cesar Chu from Panama was elected new FEPAS President.  Mr Victor Pirella from Venezuela was elected as FEPAS 2nd Vice-President.

38. According to the Respondents, “A number of individuals (including Mr Kogan and others who had been provisionally suspended as members of the FIAS Executive Committee) secretly organised a meeting in Kuala Lumpur (Malaysia) on 22 June 2013 and declared it to be an extraordinary FIAS congress. Neither the FIAS president nor any other of the acting members of the FIAS Executive had been informed about, let alone invited to, this clandestine meeting. Respondents strongly dispute that “forty-three national Sambo federations attended and authorized an Extraordinary Congress that was held in Kuala Lumpur, Malasya”. as asserted by the Appellant. This is simply not true: Many national federations have meanwhile confirmed that they did not attend that meeting and that they were surprised to see their names in the minutes. Others testified that they were not even invited. Minutes were drawn of this meeting which allegedly “decided” to elect a new FIAS Executive Board. The minutes were then brought to the Commercial Register of the Canton de Vaud which changed the entry of FIAS because the application was signed by two (suspended!) members of the FIAS Executive Committee whose suspension had not yet been communicated to the Registrar. When the CAS 2013/A/3148 11

PAASF v. FIAS & Vasily Shestakov, award of 5 September 2014 true leadership of FIAS became aware of this fraud, it immediately took legal action with the ordinary courts in Lausanne and the Canton de Vaud. It was also able to prevent the raiders from depleting the funds of FIAS with its bank. Meanwhile, on 23 August 2013, the President of the Tribunal de l’Arrondissement de Lausanne has ordered that the entry in the Commercial Register must be reversed. In particular, he ordered the Commercial Register of the Canton de Vaud to delete the entry of 18 July 2013 and to modify the entry back to the state of 15 July 2013. In addition, he ordered to completely delete the signature of Mr Nikolay Lents who was one of the driving forces behind this fraud. This decision is however on appeal now”.

39. On 18 July 2013, the commercial register of the canton of Vaud was amended so that Mr Shestakov was removed from his position as President of the FIAS and replaced by Mr Mikhail Shults. Simultaneously, Mr Jack Kogan as well as Mr Fazliddin Pulatov were registered as Vice-president and Andrejs Birjukovs, David Rudman, Pavel Gorodnov, Gasca Viorel, Eduardas Rudas, Ravshan Akhmedjanov, Kevin Dya, Ata Adayev, and Noman Hasan were registered as members of the FIAS Executive Committee.

40. On 31 October 2013 and following an order issued by the Tribunal d’arrondissement of Lausanne, the entry of FIAS in the commercial register of the canton of Vaud was changed back to the situation prior 18 July 2013. Hence, Mr Shestakov was confirmed as FIAS

President.

IV. PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE CAS

41. On 12 April 2013, the PAASF filed its statement of appeal with the CAS, pursuant to Article

R48 of the Code of Sports-related Arbitration (the “Code”), and nominated Mr Michele A. R. Bernasconi, attorney-at-law in Zurich, Switzerland, as arbitrator. Such appeal brief was later amended on 22 April 2013.

42. On 22 April 2013, the PAASF lodged its appeal brief, pursuant to Article R51 of the Code.

43. On 3 May 2013, the Respondents appointed Prof. Denis Oswald, professor of law in Colombier, Switzerland as arbitrator.

44. On 24 May 2013 and within the granted extended