Dany Brand v. World Athletics

At a glance

Parties

Dany Brand (Switzerland) v. World Athletics; International Olympic Committee as Interested Party

Case no.

CAS OG 24/013

Forum and rules

CAS ad hoc Division, Paris 2024 Olympic Games; CAS Arbitration Rules for the Olympic Games

Treaty

Olympic Charter (Rule 61.2; Rule 44, para. 5)

Tribunal

Lars Hilliger (Sole Arbitrator)

Sector

Athletics (men's 400 m hurdles); Olympic eligibility

Outcome

Jurisdiction upheld; Application dismissed (operative part 4 August 2024, reasoned award 8 August 2024).

Amount

No amount at stake. No order as to costs: the ad hoc Division's services are free, and each party bears its own costs.

The dispute

Dany Brand, a Swiss 400 m hurdler, ranked 41st on World Athletics' "Road to Paris" list for an event with 40 entries, so he was the first athlete to miss the final entry list. The French NOC entered Ludvy Vaillant on condition that he pass a "competitivity test" by 21 July 2024. Vaillant failed the test and was withdrawn on 22 July 2024, which left only 39 places filled. On 27 July 2024 Swiss Athletics asked World Athletics to have the IOC Executive Board review Vaillant's entry under Rule 44, para. 5, of the Olympic Charter, arguing that the entry was invalid because Vaillant was not "adequately prepared". World Athletics replied on 28 July 2024 that selection was a matter for the French federation and NOC, and did not forward the request. Brand asked CAS to declare him eligible. World Athletics argued that CAS lacked jurisdiction because the dispute arose before the ten-day window, that the appeal was late, that the French NOC should have been named as a respondent, that NOCs have discretion over entries, and that the IOC Late Athlete Replacement Policy did not allow the reallocation.

Key holdings

1. The ad hoc Division has jurisdiction and the appeal is admissible. The dispute arose on 28 July 2024, when the Athlete received World Athletics' letter, which showed indirectly that it had not forwarded the review request. That date falls within the ten days before the Opening Ceremony of 26 July 2024 or after it. ¶¶ 33–36
2. By asking for a review, Swiss Athletics accepted that the IOC Executive Board is the only body competent to review the French NOC's entry decision. World Athletics was not competent to declare the Athlete eligible, so an appeal against World Athletics cannot give CAS power to decide eligibility on its behalf. ¶¶ 45–48
3. The real object of the Application was World Athletics' failure to forward the request to the IOC Executive Board. But the Athlete asked only to be declared eligible, a relief that cannot be granted. Granting it would also mean the Sole Arbitrator taking the place of the IOC Executive Board. ¶¶ 49–52
4. The French NOC's entry decision was made in early July 2024, outside the ten-day period. Reviewing it through this appeal would circumvent Article 1 of the CAS Ad Hoc Rules. ¶¶ 53–54
5. The Application is dismissed. The Sole Arbitrator did not rule on whether World Athletics was right not to forward the request. He found it unnecessary to decide whether the French NOC had to be named as a respondent, or whether the Athlete had standing. ¶¶ 56–57
6. No order as to costs (Article 22 of the CAS Ad Hoc Rules). ¶¶ 58–60

Procedural history

1. 20 December 2022World Athletics publishes its Paris 2024 qualification system, with 40 entries in the men's 400 m hurdles.
2. 2 July 2024World Athletics publishes the entry list; Brand is 41st and the first athlete to miss it.
3. 22 July 2024Ludvy Vaillant is withdrawn after failing the French federation's competitivity test.
4. 27–28 July 2024Swiss Athletics requests a review under Rule 44, para. 5. World Athletics replies on 28 July 2024 without forwarding the request to the IOC (the Appealed Decision).
5. 2 August 2024Brand files his Application with the CAS ad hoc Division. Lars Hilliger is appointed Sole Arbitrator.
6. 3 August 2024World Athletics files its reply. The IOC declines to comment. The Sole Arbitrator decides that no hearing is needed.
7. 4 August 2024Operative part of the award: Application dismissed.
8. 8 August 2024Reasoned award issued.

Tribunal, counsel and experts

Decided by

• Lars Hilliger Sole arbitrator, CAS ad hoc Division — appointed by the institution

Run a conflict check on these names →

Keywords

• Paris 2024
• Olympic Games
• CAS ad hoc Division
• eligibility
• 400 m hurdles
• Rule 44 Olympic Charter
• adequately prepared
• IOC Executive Board review
• qualification system
• quota place reallocation
• Late Athlete Replacement Policy
• ten-day jurisdiction window
• prayers for relief
• Ludvy Vaillant
• Swiss Athletics

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