Vinesh Phogat v. United World Wrestling (UWW), International Olympic Committee (IOC)

At a glance

Parties

Vinesh Phogat (India) v. United World Wrestling (UWW) and International Olympic Committee (IOC); Indian Olympic Association (IOA) as Interested Party

Case no.

CAS OG 24/017

Forum and rules

CAS ad hoc Division (Olympic Games Paris 2024); CAS Arbitration Rules for the Olympic Games; seat Lausanne, Switzerland

Treaty

None. Jurisdiction rests on Rule 61.2 of the Olympic Charter

Panel

Annabelle Bennett (Sole Arbitrator)

Sector

Sport: Olympic wrestling, weight categories

Outcome

Application dismissed. Operative part issued 14 August 2024; reasoned award issued 16 August 2024.

Amount

No monetary claim. No order as to costs: the ad hoc Division's services are free of charge, and none of the parties sought costs.

The dispute

Vinesh Phogat is an Indian wrestler. On 6 August 2024 she won three bouts in the Women's Freestyle 50 kg category at the Paris 2024 Olympic Games and reached the final. At the second weigh-in on the morning of 7 August 2024 she was 100 g over the 50 kg limit. A UWW delegate disqualified her under Article 11 of the UWW International Wrestling Rules 2023, and the wrestler she had beaten in the semi-final took her place in the final. Phogat, supported by the IOA, asked CAS to set aside the decision and its effects and to award her a silver medal. She argued that a tolerance should apply to such a small excess, given her need to hydrate, water retention in the pre-menstrual phase and the travel time to the Athletes' Village. She also argued that the elimination should affect only the final, and that her rights from the first day's results should stand. UWW argued that the matter was moot and that the decision was an unreviewable field of play decision. The IOC argued that a second silver medal could not be awarded.

Key holdings

1. The CAS ad hoc Division has jurisdiction under Rule 61.2 of the Olympic Charter, and the application is admissible. Eliminating an athlete who fails the weigh-in is a decision about eligibility, not a field of play decision. ¶¶ 43–47, 59
2. The Rules require strict compliance with the weight categories, and no tolerance applies at the second weigh-in. The Olympic Games are not one of the "International Tournaments" for which Article 8 allows a 2 kg tolerance. Biological reasons such as eating, drinking and the menstrual cycle cannot excuse non-compliance. There was no evidence that the scales were faulty. ¶¶ 61, 70–71, 81–83
3. Under Article 11, an athlete who fails the weigh-in is "eliminated of the competition and ranked last, without rank". The three consequences are cumulative. The two-day Olympic tournament is a single competition, so the elimination cannot be limited to the final round. CAS panels may not rewrite federation rules. The Sole Arbitrator could not apply equity without the parties' consent (PILA Article 187(2)). ¶¶ 85–93, 104
4. The pronoun "he" in Article 11 covers all wrestlers, male and female. Article 11 therefore applies to the Applicant. ¶¶ 95–98
5. Ineligibility is not a sanction: a sanction is a penalty for wrongdoing, while ineligibility follows from an unmet requirement. Proportionality and discretion therefore do not apply. The Sole Arbitrator called the consequences "draconian" but found that the Rules allow no mitigation. The Applicant had no acquired rights from the earlier rounds, because those rights depended on her staying eligible. ¶¶ 100–101, 107–108, 111
6. CAS cannot award medals. Under Rule 56(1) of the Olympic Charter, the awarding or reallocation of medals is for the IOC alone, and the Rules make no provision for a second silver medal. The application was dismissed. The award records that there was no wrongdoing on the Athlete's part. ¶¶ 114–115, 125–126

Procedural history

1. 6 August 2024First weigh-in (49.9 kg). The Athlete wins three bouts and reaches the 50 kg final.
2. 7 August 2024The Athlete fails the second weigh-in by 100 g and receives a disqualification letter at 9h11. At 16h45 she files her application with the CAS ad hoc Division.
3. 8 August 2024The Athlete drops her requests to compete in the final and to be re-weighed. The Sole Arbitrator is appointed. The respondents file their answers and the IOA files an amicus curiae brief.
4. 9 August 2024Hearing held.
5. 11 August 2024Parties and the IOA file further submissions on questions raised by the Sole Arbitrator.
6. 14 August 2024Operative part of the award issued: the application is dismissed.
7. 16 August 2024Reasoned award issued.

Tribunal, counsel and experts

Decided by

• Annabelle Bennett Sole arbitrator, CAS ad hoc Division — appointed by the institution

For the claimant

Habbine Estelle Kim · Joëlle Monlouis · Estelle Ivanova · Charles Amson

For the respondent

Jean-Pierre Morand · Michael Kottmann · Antonio Rigozzi · Eolos Rigopoulos

For other participants

Harish Salve · Vidushpat Singhania · Nachiket Yagnik · Arnav Singhal · Saiee Godbole

Run a conflict check on these names →

Keywords

• Paris 2024 Olympic Games
• CAS ad hoc Division
• wrestling
• weigh-in
• weight category
• 50 kg
• eligibility
• field of play
• Article 11 UWW International Wrestling Rules
• weight tolerance
• ineligibility vs sanction
• proportionality
• silver medal
• medal reallocation
• Olympic Charter Rule 61
• Olympic Charter Rule 56
• acquired rights
• menstrual cycle

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