论赛场判罚不予审查原则
摘要
体育带给了人们无穷的乐趣,在体育世界里,人们可以找到激情,顽强拼搏和团队协作的精神以及公平竞赛的理念。可以说体育世界是人们在市场经济社会中寄托纯真感情的一片净土。但赛场判罚完全不予审查的做法,却与体育的公平公正精神相违背。
赛场判罚不予审查原则是法院或仲裁庭在处理与裁判判罚有关案件时经常适用的一个基本原则,该原则在保证体育比赛的正常秩序和维护体育比赛结果的确定性方面,有一定的积极性作用。但如果仔细研究该原则,就会发现许多不合理之处,首先,虽然赛场判罚不予审查原则已经被反复适用,但赛场判罚是什么,为什么不能对赛场判罚进行审查,这些问题以往的法院判决书和仲裁裁判书并没有给出明确答案,理论界也没有界定。其次,文章作者认为,该原则的行成是建立在体育组织对运动员的管理权之上的,而运动员因对赛场裁判罚不服而产生的纠纷是纠纷产生的重灾区,体育管理者企图通过牺牲运动员的权益,而一劳永逸的解决此类纠纷。该原则是极其霸道与蛮横的,体育组织利用其管理者的超然身份,无视运动员的权益,这与体育组织促进体育发展和维护运动员利益的宗旨是不相符的,与公平正义的体育精神也是相背离的。特别是要引起注意的是在整个世界都在向民主法治迈进的时候,体育世界却一步步走向了专制与独裁,体育组织限制运动员权利的情况屡有发生,这是相当危险的,历史告诉我们暴力和蛮横不能从根本上解决纠纷,只会导致纠纷的大爆发。本文分别从法理角度、制度角度以及概念角度对赛场判罚不予审查原则进行分析,论证了该原则存在诸多不合理之处,认为绝对的坚持赛场判罚不予审查原则是不应该的,应当对该原则进行完善,本文最后提出了完善该原则的建议。
People get a lot of fun from sport. In the sports world, people find passion, indomitable spirit and spirit of team work and fair competition. It is can be said that sports world is a pure land for people to project their pure emotion. However, the existence of the principle of field of play decision non-reviewed by law is going against the spirit of fair and justice.
Principle of field decision non-reviewed by law is constantly applied by courts and arbitral tribunals when they are encountered with cases involved with field decision. This principle has played a positive role in maintaining normal order and definiteness of competition result. However, if we studied deeply, we may find much nonsense of it. Firstly, although this principle has been applied for many times, its definition is not clear, nor can it be found in other research papers. Secondly, in author’s opinion, the formation of it is because of the sports organizations’administrative right over sportsman. Cases involved with field decision problems appeals frequently, so the sports organization take advantage of its dominant position, and make this principle, with the purpose to solve this problems once and for all. It is rude and unreasonable, because it sacrifice the right of sportsman, who is the cornerstone of the sports world, and it is also go against the spirit of fair and justice. Especially, when the whole world is heading for democracy and constitutionality, but the sports world is moving towards autocracy. Cases that the sports organization restraint the sportsman’s right happen again and again. This is a dangerous phenomenon. History tells us that autocracy can not solve problems thoroughly; it only leads to an eruption. This paper is going to analyze this principle from the aspects of jurisprudence, system and definition. And prove that this principle is unreasonable, it should be perfected, at last of this paper, the author offer some advices of completion.
赛场判罚不予审查原则是法院或仲裁庭在处理与裁判判罚有关案件时经常适用的一个基本原则,该原则在保证体育比赛的正常秩序和维护体育比赛结果的确定性方面,有一定的积极性作用。但如果仔细研究该原则,就会发现许多不合理之处,首先,虽然赛场判罚不予审查原则已经被反复适用,但赛场判罚是什么,为什么不能对赛场判罚进行审查,这些问题以往的法院判决书和仲裁裁判书并没有给出明确答案,理论界也没有界定。其次,文章作者认为,该原则的行成是建立在体育组织对运动员的管理权之上的,而运动员因对赛场裁判罚不服而产生的纠纷是纠纷产生的重灾区,体育管理者企图通过牺牲运动员的权益,而一劳永逸的解决此类纠纷。该原则是极其霸道与蛮横的,体育组织利用其管理者的超然身份,无视运动员的权益,这与体育组织促进体育发展和维护运动员利益的宗旨是不相符的,与公平正义的体育精神也是相背离的。特别是要引起注意的是在整个世界都在向民主法治迈进的时候,体育世界却一步步走向了专制与独裁,体育组织限制运动员权利的情况屡有发生,这是相当危险的,历史告诉我们暴力和蛮横不能从根本上解决纠纷,只会导致纠纷的大爆发。本文分别从法理角度、制度角度以及概念角度对赛场判罚不予审查原则进行分析,论证了该原则存在诸多不合理之处,认为绝对的坚持赛场判罚不予审查原则是不应该的,应当对该原则进行完善,本文最后提出了完善该原则的建议。
People get a lot of fun from sport. In the sports world, people find passion, indomitable spirit and spirit of team work and fair competition. It is can be said that sports world is a pure land for people to project their pure emotion. However, the existence of the principle of field of play decision non-reviewed by law is going against the spirit of fair and justice.
Principle of field decision non-reviewed by law is constantly applied by courts and arbitral tribunals when they are encountered with cases involved with field decision. This principle has played a positive role in maintaining normal order and definiteness of competition result. However, if we studied deeply, we may find much nonsense of it. Firstly, although this principle has been applied for many times, its definition is not clear, nor can it be found in other research papers. Secondly, in author’s opinion, the formation of it is because of the sports organizations’administrative right over sportsman. Cases involved with field decision problems appeals frequently, so the sports organization take advantage of its dominant position, and make this principle, with the purpose to solve this problems once and for all. It is rude and unreasonable, because it sacrifice the right of sportsman, who is the cornerstone of the sports world, and it is also go against the spirit of fair and justice. Especially, when the whole world is heading for democracy and constitutionality, but the sports world is moving towards autocracy. Cases that the sports organization restraint the sportsman’s right happen again and again. This is a dangerous phenomenon. History tells us that autocracy can not solve problems thoroughly; it only leads to an eruption. This paper is going to analyze this principle from the aspects of jurisprudence, system and definition. And prove that this principle is unreasonable, it should be perfected, at last of this paper, the author offer some advices of completion.
引文
①1983年成立,是一个独立自主地解决国际和国内体育纠纷的审判机构,总部坐落于瑞士洛桑。
②Alan Abrahamson& Diane Pucin, Hamm Takes Issue with Medal Dispute L.A.Times Aug.23,2004,at D1
①郭树理:《体育纠纷的多元化救济机制探讨——比较法与国际法的视野》,法律出版社2004年版。
②郭树理:《论司法对体育行会内部纠纷的干预》,北京市政法管理干部学院学报2003年第3期。
③朱文英:《体育仲裁受案范围研究》,天津体育学院学报2007年第1期。
①朱文英:《裁判法律责任初探》,北京体育大学学报2009年第3期。
②R.Jake Locklear,Arbitration in Olympic Disputes:Should Arbitrators Review the Field of Play Decisions of Officials,Texas Review of Entertainment & Sports Law199, 2003.
③Kristin L.Savrese, Judging the Judges:Dispute Resolution at the Olympic Games, Brooklyn Journal of International Law 1107, 2005.
①S. Christopher Szczerban, Tackling Instant Replay: A Proposal to Protect the Competitive Judgments of Sports Officials, Copyright (c) 2007 University of Virginia School of Law Virginia Sports & Entertainment Law Journal.
②Kenneth W. Biedzynsk, ESQ,Sports officials should only be liable for acts of gross negligence: Is that the right call,Copyright (c) 1994 University of Miami Entertainment & Sports Law Review 199411 U. Miami Ent. & Sports L. Rev. 375.
③James A.R. Nafziger. The future of international sports law. Copyright (c) 2006 Willamette Law Review 2006, 42 Willamette L. Rev. 861.
④Bennett Liebman. An argument for limited review in horce racing. Texas Review of Entertainment & Sports Law Spring, 2005 Tex. Rev. Ent. & Sports L. 23.
①Patrick B. Fife. it’s time for congress to step into the ring and save the sport of boxing. Hofstra Law Review, Summer, 2002, 30 Hofstra L. Rev. 1299.
②William A. Birdthistle. Football most foul. The Green Bag An Entertaining Journal of Law, Winter, 2007, 10 Green Bag 2d 159.
①(1996) 1 Digest of CAS Awards 412 (Mengdy).
②(2002) 2 Digest of CAS Awards 674.
③Arbitration CAS ad hoc Division (O.G. Salt Lake City) 02/007, Korean Olympic Committee (KOC) / International Skating Union (ISU), award of 23 February 2002.
①朱文英:《裁判法律责任初探》,《北京体育大学学报》,2009年第3期。
②魏波、罗大钧:《体育纠纷司法介入之思考》,《武汉体育大学学报》,2005年第4期。
③R. Jake Locklear,Arbitration in Olympic Disputes: Should Arbitrators Review the Field of Play Decisions of Officials,Texas Review of Entertainment & Sports Law199, 2003.
①郭华成:《法律解释比较研究》,中国人民出版社,1993年版第32页。
①孟德斯鸠:《论法的精神》下册商务印书馆,1987年版第154页。
①黄世席:《奥运会参赛运动员的法律权利和义务》,武汉体育大学学报2008年第2期。
①Arbitration CAS ad hoc Division (O.G. Salt Lake City) 02/007.
②S. Christopher Szczerban A Proposal to Protect the Competitive Judgments of Sports Officials, Virginia Sports & Entertainment Law Journal,Spring, 2007.
①(2000) 2 Digest of CAS Awards 680.
②[日]谷口安平:《程序正义与诉讼(增补本)》,王亚新,刘荣军译,中国政法大学出版社2002年版,第1页。
③夏良田:《证明责任分配法理分析》,《社会科学家》2009年第1期。
④夏良田:《证明责任分配法理分析》,《社会科学家》2009年第1期。
⑤夏良田:《证明责任分配法理分析》,《社会科学家》2009年第1期。
①黄世席:《奥运会参赛运动员的法律权利和义务》,《武汉体育学院学报》2008年第2期。
②汤维建,陈开欣:《试论英美证据法上的刑事证明标准》,《政法论坛》1993年第4期。
①郭树理:《体育纠纷的多元化救济机制探讨---比较法与国际法的视野》,法律出版社2004年版,第9页。
②郭红莲:《中国足球“黑哨”现象的人性成因》,《体育学刊》2006年第5期,第9页。
③杨文斌,段爱明:《关于中国足球不良现象成因的文化思考》,《体育世界》2007年第2期。
①Arbitration CAS ad hoc Division (O.G. Sydney) 00/013 Bernardo Segura / International Amateur Athletic Federation (IAAF), award of 30 September 2000
[1]郭树理.体育纠纷的多元化救济机制探讨——比较法与国际法的视野[M].北京:法律出版社,2004.
[2] [英]布莱克肖.体育纠纷的调解解决:国内与国际的视野[M].北京:中国检察出版社,2005.
[3] [美]詹姆斯·托马, [澳]劳伦斯·查里普著.国际体育管理[M].北京:人民体育出版社,2000.
[4]黄世席.奥林匹克赛事争议与仲裁[M].北京:法律出版社,2005.
[5]王铁崖:国际法[M].北京:法律出版社,1995年版.
[6] [美]E·博登海默著.法理学——法律哲学与法律方法[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2004.
[7]李步云.人权法学[M] .北京:高等教育出版社,2005 :28 - 45.
[8] [日]谷口安平.程序正义与诉讼(增补本) [M],王亚新,刘荣军译,中国政法大学出版社,2002.
[9]董小龙,郭春玲.体育法学[M].北京:法律出版社,2006.
[10]孟德斯鸠.论法的精神[M].下册商务印书馆1987.
[11]沈宗灵.比较法研究[M].北京:北京大学出版社,1998.
[12]第29届奥林匹克运动会组织委员会.奥林匹克知识产权保护文件汇编[M].北京:法律出版社,2005.
[13]曹可强.体育产业概论[M].上海:复旦大学出版社,2004.
[14]姜仁屏,刘菊昌.体育法学[M].黑龙江:黑龙江人民出版社,1994.
[15]张厚福.体育法理[M].北京:人民体育出版社,2001.
[16]汤卫东.体育法学[M] .南京:南京师范大学出版社,2000.
[17]吴兆祥.奥林匹克运动[M] .安徽:安徽大学出版社,2004.
[18]崔乐泉.奥林匹克运动简明百科[M].北京:中华书局出版社,2003.
[19]任海.奥林匹克运动读本[M].北京:人民体育出版社,2005.
[20]刘晓非.从雅典到北京奥运风云录[M].清华大学出版社,2004.
[21]肖永平.国际私法原理[M].北京:法律出版社,2007.
[22]潘建林.奥林匹克大家庭[M].北京:大众文艺出版社,2000.
[23]王泽鉴.民法总则[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2001.
[24] [日]美浓部达吉.公法与私法[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2003.
[25]李光辉、李红等.当代国际法热点问题研究[M].北京:中国法制出版社, 2005.
[26]张文显:中国国际法学精萃[M],北京:高等教育出版社,2004.
[27]饶戈平.国际组织法[M].北京:北京大学出版社,1996.
[28]梁西.国际法[M].北京:法律出版社,2003.
[29]刘超等.国际法专论[M].北京:知识产权出版社,2004.
[30]李先波等著:主权、人权、国际组织[M].北京:法律出版社,2005.
[31] [英]劳特派特.奥本海国际法上卷[M].北京:商务印书馆.
[32] A.P.登特列夫.自然法——法律哲学导论[M].台湾:台湾联经出版事业公司,1984.
[33]朱景文.比较法社会学的框架和方法——法制化、本土化和全球化[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2001.
[34] [英]洛克.政府论(下篇)[M].北京:商务印书馆,1983.
[35]张乃根.国际法原理[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2002.
[36] [英]M·阿库斯特.现代国际法概论[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,1983.
[37] [西]胡安·安东尼奥·萨马兰奇.萨马兰奇奥林匹克回忆[M].北京:世界知识出版社,2003.
[38]邵沙平、余敏友.国际法问题专论[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社,2002.
[39]格·童金.国际法原理[M].北京:中国民主法制出版社,2006.
[40]沈涓.中国区际冲突法研究[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2003.
[41]李双元.国际私法(冲突法篇)[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社,2001.
[42]梁慧星.民商法论丛(第34卷)[M].北京:法律出版社,2006.
[43]黄进.武大国际法评论第[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社,2007.
[44]李双元.国际法与比较法论丛[M].北京:中国方正出版社,2003.
[1]郭红莲:《中国足球“黑哨”现象的人性成因》,《体育学刊》[J].2006年第5期,第9页。
[2]杨文斌,段爱明:《关于中国足球不良现象成因的文化思考》,《体育世界》[J].2007年第2期。
[3]汤维建,陈开欣:《试论英美证据法上的刑事证明标准》,《政法论坛》[J].1993年第4期。
[4]夏良田:《证明责任分配法理分析》,《社会科学家》[J].2009年第1期。
[5]黄世席:《奥运会参赛运动员的法律权利和义务》,《武汉体育学院学报》[J].2008年第2期。
[6]孙葆丽.奥林匹克运动三大支柱之间的关系[J].体育文史.1994,(3).
[7]孙葆洁、沈志萍.国际奥委会的“逆向代表制”[J].中国学校体育,1996,(4) .
[8]茹秀英.国际奥委会与国际单项体育联合会关系由来与发展的历史透视[J].沈阳体育学院学报,2004, (1) .
[9]筎秀英.国际奥委会创立的历史研究[J].西安体育学院学报,2006, (1) .
[10]刘进枰、蔡祯雄.布伦达治对我国奥委会会籍所持的态度之探讨(1952-1972)[J].中华民国体育学会体育学报,1993, (15) .
[11]赵睿.龚建平被控“受贿罪”,律师认为中国足协也已定位[N ].每日新报. 2003- 1- 30
[12]杨洪云、张杰.论体育纠纷的争端解决机制[J ].体育学刊. 2002 (4) : 30.
[13]黄世席.仲裁解决体育争议初探[J].北京体育大学学报,2004, (12) .
[14]郭树理.国际奥委会体育仲裁院体育仲裁制度述评[J ].仲裁与法律. 2002 (4) : 26- 36
[15]肖永平、孙玉超奥运会裁判执法争议解决机制的完善与展望[J].华东政法大学学报2008第3期
[16]张江南,李爱群.国际奥林匹克运动组织管理体制研究[J].武汉体育学院学报,2003, (1) .
[17]周玲.北京奥组委与中国奥委会法律地位比较[J].体育文化导刊,2003, (6) .
[18]王明立.奥运会电视转播权的营销之策[J].山东体育科技,2000, (4) .
[19]赵爱国.国际政治视角中的奥林匹克运动[J].体育文化导刊,2004 , (3) .
[20]郭树理:论司法对体育行会内部纠纷的干预[J].北京市政法管理干部学院学报,2003.
[21]朱文英:体育仲裁受案范围研究[J].天津体育学院学报,2007.
[22]朱文英:裁判法律责任初探[J].北京体育大学学报,2009.
[23]熊斗寅.新版奥林匹克宪章解读[J].体育文化导刊,2004 , (2) .
[24]张鲁宁.论政治因素与奥林匹克运动的相互制约与影响[J].沈阳体育学院学报,2006, (6)
[1] James A R Nafziger. International Sports Law[M].Transnational Publishers,2004.
[2] Andrew Caiger Simon Gardiner, Professional Sport in the European Union: Regulation and Re-regulation[M]. T·M·C Asser press, the Hague,2001.
[3] Robert Alexy. A Theory of Constitutional Right s [M] . t ranslated by J ulian Rivers. New York : Oxford UniversityPress , 2002.
[4] Matthieu Reeb. Digest of CAS AwardsⅡ1998—2000 [M] .Netherland : Kluwer Law International ,2002.
[5] Edward Grayson. Sports and the Law[M].Butterworth,2000 .
[1] Timothy Davis. What is Sports Law? [J].Marquette Sports Law Review, Spring,2001.
[2] R.Jake Locklear,Arbitration in Olympic Disputes: Should Arbitrators Review the Field of Play Decisions of Officials? Texas Review of Entertainment & Sports Law199, 2003. S. Christopher Szczerban, Tackling Instant Replay: A Proposal to Protect the Competitive Judgments of Sports Officials, Copyright (c) 2007 University of Virginia School of Law Virginia Sports & Entertainment Law Journal.
[3] Kristin L.Savrese, Judging the Judges:Dispute Resolution at the Olympic Games, Brooklyn Journal of International Law 1107, 2005.
[4] S. Christopher Szczerban, Tackling Instant Replay: A Proposal to Protect the Competitive Judgments of Sports Officials, Copyright (c) 2007 University of Virginia School of Law Virginia Sports & Entertainment Law Journal.
[5] Jenny A. Urquhart. Why the International Olympic Committee Must Set Standards for Judging and Scoring to Save the Olympic Games[J].Penn State International Law Review, 2005.
[6] Simon Gardiner. Sports Law [J].Cavendish Publishing Limited, Vol.1,2001.
[7] James A.R. Nafziger. The Future of International Sports Law [J].Willamette Law Review Willamette Law Review,Vol.42,2006 .
[8] James A.R. Nafziger. Arbitration of Rights and Obligations in the International Sports Arena [J].Valparaiso University Law Review Spring ,Vol.35,2001 .
[9] James A.R. Nafziger. International Sports Law: A Replay of Characteristics and Trends[J]. The American Journal of International Law,Vol.86,1992.
[10] Kenneth W. Biedzynsk, ESQ,Sports officials should only be liable for acts of gross negligence: Is that the right call,Copyright (c) 1994 University of Miami Entertainment & Sports Law Review 1994.
[11] Bennett Liebman. An argument for limited review in horce racing. Texas Review of Entertainment & Sports Law Spring, 2005 .
[12] Patrick B. Fife. it’s time for congress to step into the ring and save the sport of boxing. Hofstra Law Review, Summer, 2002.
[13] William A. Birdthistle. Football most foul. The Green Bag An Entertaining Journal of Law, Winter, 2007.
②Alan Abrahamson& Diane Pucin, Hamm Takes Issue with Medal Dispute L.A.Times Aug.23,2004,at D1
①郭树理:《体育纠纷的多元化救济机制探讨——比较法与国际法的视野》,法律出版社2004年版。
②郭树理:《论司法对体育行会内部纠纷的干预》,北京市政法管理干部学院学报2003年第3期。
③朱文英:《体育仲裁受案范围研究》,天津体育学院学报2007年第1期。
①朱文英:《裁判法律责任初探》,北京体育大学学报2009年第3期。
②R.Jake Locklear,Arbitration in Olympic Disputes:Should Arbitrators Review the Field of Play Decisions of Officials,Texas Review of Entertainment & Sports Law199, 2003.
③Kristin L.Savrese, Judging the Judges:Dispute Resolution at the Olympic Games, Brooklyn Journal of International Law 1107, 2005.
①S. Christopher Szczerban, Tackling Instant Replay: A Proposal to Protect the Competitive Judgments of Sports Officials, Copyright (c) 2007 University of Virginia School of Law Virginia Sports & Entertainment Law Journal.
②Kenneth W. Biedzynsk, ESQ,Sports officials should only be liable for acts of gross negligence: Is that the right call,Copyright (c) 1994 University of Miami Entertainment & Sports Law Review 199411 U. Miami Ent. & Sports L. Rev. 375.
③James A.R. Nafziger. The future of international sports law. Copyright (c) 2006 Willamette Law Review 2006, 42 Willamette L. Rev. 861.
④Bennett Liebman. An argument for limited review in horce racing. Texas Review of Entertainment & Sports Law Spring, 2005 Tex. Rev. Ent. & Sports L. 23.
①Patrick B. Fife. it’s time for congress to step into the ring and save the sport of boxing. Hofstra Law Review, Summer, 2002, 30 Hofstra L. Rev. 1299.
②William A. Birdthistle. Football most foul. The Green Bag An Entertaining Journal of Law, Winter, 2007, 10 Green Bag 2d 159.
①(1996) 1 Digest of CAS Awards 412 (Mengdy).
②(2002) 2 Digest of CAS Awards 674.
③Arbitration CAS ad hoc Division (O.G. Salt Lake City) 02/007, Korean Olympic Committee (KOC) / International Skating Union (ISU), award of 23 February 2002.
①朱文英:《裁判法律责任初探》,《北京体育大学学报》,2009年第3期。
②魏波、罗大钧:《体育纠纷司法介入之思考》,《武汉体育大学学报》,2005年第4期。
③R. Jake Locklear,Arbitration in Olympic Disputes: Should Arbitrators Review the Field of Play Decisions of Officials,Texas Review of Entertainment & Sports Law199, 2003.
①郭华成:《法律解释比较研究》,中国人民出版社,1993年版第32页。
①孟德斯鸠:《论法的精神》下册商务印书馆,1987年版第154页。
①黄世席:《奥运会参赛运动员的法律权利和义务》,武汉体育大学学报2008年第2期。
①Arbitration CAS ad hoc Division (O.G. Salt Lake City) 02/007.
②S. Christopher Szczerban A Proposal to Protect the Competitive Judgments of Sports Officials, Virginia Sports & Entertainment Law Journal,Spring, 2007.
①(2000) 2 Digest of CAS Awards 680.
②[日]谷口安平:《程序正义与诉讼(增补本)》,王亚新,刘荣军译,中国政法大学出版社2002年版,第1页。
③夏良田:《证明责任分配法理分析》,《社会科学家》2009年第1期。
④夏良田:《证明责任分配法理分析》,《社会科学家》2009年第1期。
⑤夏良田:《证明责任分配法理分析》,《社会科学家》2009年第1期。
①黄世席:《奥运会参赛运动员的法律权利和义务》,《武汉体育学院学报》2008年第2期。
②汤维建,陈开欣:《试论英美证据法上的刑事证明标准》,《政法论坛》1993年第4期。
①郭树理:《体育纠纷的多元化救济机制探讨---比较法与国际法的视野》,法律出版社2004年版,第9页。
②郭红莲:《中国足球“黑哨”现象的人性成因》,《体育学刊》2006年第5期,第9页。
③杨文斌,段爱明:《关于中国足球不良现象成因的文化思考》,《体育世界》2007年第2期。
①Arbitration CAS ad hoc Division (O.G. Sydney) 00/013 Bernardo Segura / International Amateur Athletic Federation (IAAF), award of 30 September 2000
[1]郭树理.体育纠纷的多元化救济机制探讨——比较法与国际法的视野[M].北京:法律出版社,2004.
[2] [英]布莱克肖.体育纠纷的调解解决:国内与国际的视野[M].北京:中国检察出版社,2005.
[3] [美]詹姆斯·托马, [澳]劳伦斯·查里普著.国际体育管理[M].北京:人民体育出版社,2000.
[4]黄世席.奥林匹克赛事争议与仲裁[M].北京:法律出版社,2005.
[5]王铁崖:国际法[M].北京:法律出版社,1995年版.
[6] [美]E·博登海默著.法理学——法律哲学与法律方法[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2004.
[7]李步云.人权法学[M] .北京:高等教育出版社,2005 :28 - 45.
[8] [日]谷口安平.程序正义与诉讼(增补本) [M],王亚新,刘荣军译,中国政法大学出版社,2002.
[9]董小龙,郭春玲.体育法学[M].北京:法律出版社,2006.
[10]孟德斯鸠.论法的精神[M].下册商务印书馆1987.
[11]沈宗灵.比较法研究[M].北京:北京大学出版社,1998.
[12]第29届奥林匹克运动会组织委员会.奥林匹克知识产权保护文件汇编[M].北京:法律出版社,2005.
[13]曹可强.体育产业概论[M].上海:复旦大学出版社,2004.
[14]姜仁屏,刘菊昌.体育法学[M].黑龙江:黑龙江人民出版社,1994.
[15]张厚福.体育法理[M].北京:人民体育出版社,2001.
[16]汤卫东.体育法学[M] .南京:南京师范大学出版社,2000.
[17]吴兆祥.奥林匹克运动[M] .安徽:安徽大学出版社,2004.
[18]崔乐泉.奥林匹克运动简明百科[M].北京:中华书局出版社,2003.
[19]任海.奥林匹克运动读本[M].北京:人民体育出版社,2005.
[20]刘晓非.从雅典到北京奥运风云录[M].清华大学出版社,2004.
[21]肖永平.国际私法原理[M].北京:法律出版社,2007.
[22]潘建林.奥林匹克大家庭[M].北京:大众文艺出版社,2000.
[23]王泽鉴.民法总则[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2001.
[24] [日]美浓部达吉.公法与私法[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2003.
[25]李光辉、李红等.当代国际法热点问题研究[M].北京:中国法制出版社, 2005.
[26]张文显:中国国际法学精萃[M],北京:高等教育出版社,2004.
[27]饶戈平.国际组织法[M].北京:北京大学出版社,1996.
[28]梁西.国际法[M].北京:法律出版社,2003.
[29]刘超等.国际法专论[M].北京:知识产权出版社,2004.
[30]李先波等著:主权、人权、国际组织[M].北京:法律出版社,2005.
[31] [英]劳特派特.奥本海国际法上卷[M].北京:商务印书馆.
[32] A.P.登特列夫.自然法——法律哲学导论[M].台湾:台湾联经出版事业公司,1984.
[33]朱景文.比较法社会学的框架和方法——法制化、本土化和全球化[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2001.
[34] [英]洛克.政府论(下篇)[M].北京:商务印书馆,1983.
[35]张乃根.国际法原理[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2002.
[36] [英]M·阿库斯特.现代国际法概论[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,1983.
[37] [西]胡安·安东尼奥·萨马兰奇.萨马兰奇奥林匹克回忆[M].北京:世界知识出版社,2003.
[38]邵沙平、余敏友.国际法问题专论[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社,2002.
[39]格·童金.国际法原理[M].北京:中国民主法制出版社,2006.
[40]沈涓.中国区际冲突法研究[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2003.
[41]李双元.国际私法(冲突法篇)[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社,2001.
[42]梁慧星.民商法论丛(第34卷)[M].北京:法律出版社,2006.
[43]黄进.武大国际法评论第[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社,2007.
[44]李双元.国际法与比较法论丛[M].北京:中国方正出版社,2003.
[1]郭红莲:《中国足球“黑哨”现象的人性成因》,《体育学刊》[J].2006年第5期,第9页。
[2]杨文斌,段爱明:《关于中国足球不良现象成因的文化思考》,《体育世界》[J].2007年第2期。
[3]汤维建,陈开欣:《试论英美证据法上的刑事证明标准》,《政法论坛》[J].1993年第4期。
[4]夏良田:《证明责任分配法理分析》,《社会科学家》[J].2009年第1期。
[5]黄世席:《奥运会参赛运动员的法律权利和义务》,《武汉体育学院学报》[J].2008年第2期。
[6]孙葆丽.奥林匹克运动三大支柱之间的关系[J].体育文史.1994,(3).
[7]孙葆洁、沈志萍.国际奥委会的“逆向代表制”[J].中国学校体育,1996,(4) .
[8]茹秀英.国际奥委会与国际单项体育联合会关系由来与发展的历史透视[J].沈阳体育学院学报,2004, (1) .
[9]筎秀英.国际奥委会创立的历史研究[J].西安体育学院学报,2006, (1) .
[10]刘进枰、蔡祯雄.布伦达治对我国奥委会会籍所持的态度之探讨(1952-1972)[J].中华民国体育学会体育学报,1993, (15) .
[11]赵睿.龚建平被控“受贿罪”,律师认为中国足协也已定位[N ].每日新报. 2003- 1- 30
[12]杨洪云、张杰.论体育纠纷的争端解决机制[J ].体育学刊. 2002 (4) : 30.
[13]黄世席.仲裁解决体育争议初探[J].北京体育大学学报,2004, (12) .
[14]郭树理.国际奥委会体育仲裁院体育仲裁制度述评[J ].仲裁与法律. 2002 (4) : 26- 36
[15]肖永平、孙玉超奥运会裁判执法争议解决机制的完善与展望[J].华东政法大学学报2008第3期
[16]张江南,李爱群.国际奥林匹克运动组织管理体制研究[J].武汉体育学院学报,2003, (1) .
[17]周玲.北京奥组委与中国奥委会法律地位比较[J].体育文化导刊,2003, (6) .
[18]王明立.奥运会电视转播权的营销之策[J].山东体育科技,2000, (4) .
[19]赵爱国.国际政治视角中的奥林匹克运动[J].体育文化导刊,2004 , (3) .
[20]郭树理:论司法对体育行会内部纠纷的干预[J].北京市政法管理干部学院学报,2003.
[21]朱文英:体育仲裁受案范围研究[J].天津体育学院学报,2007.
[22]朱文英:裁判法律责任初探[J].北京体育大学学报,2009.
[23]熊斗寅.新版奥林匹克宪章解读[J].体育文化导刊,2004 , (2) .
[24]张鲁宁.论政治因素与奥林匹克运动的相互制约与影响[J].沈阳体育学院学报,2006, (6)
[1] James A R Nafziger. International Sports Law[M].Transnational Publishers,2004.
[2] Andrew Caiger Simon Gardiner, Professional Sport in the European Union: Regulation and Re-regulation[M]. T·M·C Asser press, the Hague,2001.
[3] Robert Alexy. A Theory of Constitutional Right s [M] . t ranslated by J ulian Rivers. New York : Oxford UniversityPress , 2002.
[4] Matthieu Reeb. Digest of CAS AwardsⅡ1998—2000 [M] .Netherland : Kluwer Law International ,2002.
[5] Edward Grayson. Sports and the Law[M].Butterworth,2000 .
[1] Timothy Davis. What is Sports Law? [J].Marquette Sports Law Review, Spring,2001.
[2] R.Jake Locklear,Arbitration in Olympic Disputes: Should Arbitrators Review the Field of Play Decisions of Officials? Texas Review of Entertainment & Sports Law199, 2003. S. Christopher Szczerban, Tackling Instant Replay: A Proposal to Protect the Competitive Judgments of Sports Officials, Copyright (c) 2007 University of Virginia School of Law Virginia Sports & Entertainment Law Journal.
[3] Kristin L.Savrese, Judging the Judges:Dispute Resolution at the Olympic Games, Brooklyn Journal of International Law 1107, 2005.
[4] S. Christopher Szczerban, Tackling Instant Replay: A Proposal to Protect the Competitive Judgments of Sports Officials, Copyright (c) 2007 University of Virginia School of Law Virginia Sports & Entertainment Law Journal.
[5] Jenny A. Urquhart. Why the International Olympic Committee Must Set Standards for Judging and Scoring to Save the Olympic Games[J].Penn State International Law Review, 2005.
[6] Simon Gardiner. Sports Law [J].Cavendish Publishing Limited, Vol.1,2001.
[7] James A.R. Nafziger. The Future of International Sports Law [J].Willamette Law Review Willamette Law Review,Vol.42,2006 .
[8] James A.R. Nafziger. Arbitration of Rights and Obligations in the International Sports Arena [J].Valparaiso University Law Review Spring ,Vol.35,2001 .
[9] James A.R. Nafziger. International Sports Law: A Replay of Characteristics and Trends[J]. The American Journal of International Law,Vol.86,1992.
[10] Kenneth W. Biedzynsk, ESQ,Sports officials should only be liable for acts of gross negligence: Is that the right call,Copyright (c) 1994 University of Miami Entertainment & Sports Law Review 1994.
[11] Bennett Liebman. An argument for limited review in horce racing. Texas Review of Entertainment & Sports Law Spring, 2005 .
[12] Patrick B. Fife. it’s time for congress to step into the ring and save the sport of boxing. Hofstra Law Review, Summer, 2002.
[13] William A. Birdthistle. Football most foul. The Green Bag An Entertaining Journal of Law, Winter, 2007.