24887
wp-singular,post-template-default,single,single-post,postid-24887,single-format-standard,wp-theme-stockholm,wp-child-theme-stockholm-child,stockholm-core-2.2.8,select-child-theme-ver-1.1,select-theme-ver-8.7,ajax_fade,page_not_loaded, vertical_menu_hidden,,qode_footer_adv_responsiveness,qode_footer_adv_responsiveness_1024,qode_footer_adv_responsiveness_one_column,qode_menu_center,qode-mobile-logo-set,wpb-js-composer js-comp-ver-7.7.2,vc_responsive

ESTELLE IVANOVA LATEST NEW LAW JOURNAL ARTICLE

Dr Estelle Ivanova has published a new article in the New Law Journal (www.newlawjournal.co.uk) on the long-awaited judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in the case of RFC Seraing v FIFA (Case C-600/23).

This important case posed the delicate question of the extent to which arbitral awards rendered by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), based in Lausanne, Switzerland, which is not a member of the European Union (EU), can be subject to review by EU national courts?

In other words, are there any limitations on the principle of ‘res judicata’ as applied to CAS awards?

The CJEU decided, only partially following the Opinion of the Advocate General in the case, that CAS awards can be reviewed by EU Member State courts, but only on matters of EU public policy.

As she points out in her article, the principle of res judicata, so vital to the finality and stability of arbitral awards, must now yield to the primacy of judicial review under EU law.

See our previous Post on our website of 1 August 2025 on the Seraing case.

For further information, email Dr Estelle Ivanova at ivanova@valloni.ch.