Adrien Coulibaly v. Comité National Olympique et Sportif Français (CNOSF)

At a glance

Parties

Adrien Coulibaly (France) v. Comité National Olympique et Sportif Français (CNOSF); interested parties: Fédération Française d'Athlétisme (FFA), World Athletics, the IOC, and the athletes Thomas Jordier and David Sombe

Case no.

CAS JO 24/011 (CAS ad hoc Division, Olympic Games Paris 2024)

Forum and rules

CAS ad hoc Division; CAS Arbitration Rules for the Olympic Games; Olympic Charter Rule 61.2

Tribunal

Carine Dupeyron (Sole Arbitrator)

Sector

Athletics (men's 4 x 400m relay); Olympic selection

Outcome

Jurisdiction declined ratione temporis. The operative part was issued on 4 August 2024 and the reasoned award on 10 August 2024.

The dispute

Adrien Coulibaly is a French 400m runner. He finished seventh at the French Elite Championships in Angers (28–30 June 2024) and was not selected for the men's 4 x 400m relay at the Paris 2024 Olympic Games. The FFA's list, published on 7 July 2024, included Thomas Jordier and David Sombe, although neither had run at the championships. The CNOSF confirmed the list on 8 July 2024. A CNOSF conciliator found that the FFA had made an error of law. He proposed on 18 July 2024 that the FFA select one additional athlete, but the FFA rejected the proposal on 25 July 2024, saying the CNOSF could no longer enter an extra athlete. Coulibaly argued that the conciliation proposal was enforceable under Article R. 141-23 of the French Code du sport. He asked the ad hoc Division to annul the CNOSF's refusal and to have himself entered, or to replace Jordier and Sombe, and he sought urgent provisional measures. The CNOSF objected to jurisdiction ratione personae, ratione materiae and ratione temporis, and argued on the merits that the non-selection could not be criticised.

Key holdings

1. Jurisdiction ratione personae is upheld. An athlete contesting non-selection is not a party to the Olympic Charter, but the athlete's wish to compete lets them accept the arbitration clause in Rule 61.2 as an offer to arbitrate. It does not matter that the athlete was not accredited. ¶¶ 47–49
2. The CNOSF's reply to the FFA of 25 July 2024 is not a "decision" that can be challenged. It belonged only to the conciliation between Coulibaly and the FFA, to which the CNOSF was not a party. ¶¶ 53–55
3. The CNOSF's entry with World Athletics, on 7 July 2024, of the athletes selected by the FFA was more than an administrative act. It is a decision of the CNOSF that can be challenged, so jurisdiction ratione materiae exists. ¶¶ 56–57
4. No jurisdiction ratione temporis. A dispute arises on the date the parties' disagreement arises, not on the date the request is filed. The opening ceremony was on 26 July 2024, so the ad hoc Division covers only disputes arising from 16 July 2024. This dispute arose on or about 7 July 2024, when Coulibaly learned of his non-selection, and before he went to conciliation on 12 July 2024. ¶¶ 58–64
5. Because the Division lacked jurisdiction, the merits were not examined. The ad hoc Division declared that it had no jurisdiction to decide the request. ¶ 65; Decision

Procedural history

1. 7 July 2024The FFA published the Olympic athletics selection; Coulibaly was not on it.
2. 12 July 2024Coulibaly referred his non-selection to the CNOSF conciliation service. The hearing took place on 17 July 2024.
3. 18 July 2024The conciliator, Franck Latty, proposed that the FFA select one additional relay athlete.
4. 25 July 2024The FFA rejected the conciliation proposal, citing the CNOSF's confirmation that an extra athlete could no longer be entered.
5. 31 July 2024Coulibaly filed his request with the CAS ad hoc Division. The operative part of the award gives the filing date as 29 July 2024.
6. 1 August 2024Carine Dupeyron was appointed Sole Arbitrator.
7. 3 August 2024Hearing held at the Tribunal judiciaire de Paris.
8. 4 August 2024Operative part issued: the ad hoc Division has no jurisdiction. The reasoned award followed on 10 August 2024.

Tribunal, counsel and experts

Decided by

• Carine Dupeyron Sole arbitrator, CAS ad hoc Division — appointed by the institution

For the claimant

Christophe Bertrand

For the respondent

SELARL CDES Conseil · CNOSF Legal Department

For other participants

Antonio Rigozzi · Nicolas Zbinden · Carlo de Angeli · Vijay Parbat

Run a conflict check on these names →

Keywords

• Olympic selection
• Paris 2024
• 4 x 400m relay
• athletics
• CAS ad hoc Division
• Olympic Charter Rule 61.2
• jurisdiction ratione temporis
• jurisdiction ratione personae
• jurisdiction ratione materiae
• ten-day rule
• offer to arbitrate
• CNOSF conciliation
• Code du sport
• eligibility
• FFA
• World Athletics
• appealable decision

Summary generated with AI from the published documents — refer to the award for the authoritative text.