National Sports Tribunal: Essay On Resolving Sports Industry Disputes.

Overview of National Sports Tribunal

According to the applicable legal laws relating to the resolution of disputes in the sports industry including the sport of Soccer, the government has established a tribunal known as the National Sports Tribunal. Anti-doping rule valuations, disciplinary disputes, disputes over player selection and eligibility, and arguments over bullying, harassment, or discrimination are among the issues handled by this tribunal in the sports business. Other problems, such as contractual or compensation conflicts, disagreements over employment matters, or disputes that have arisen in the field of play, are not within the purview of this National Sports Tribunal (National Sports Tribunal, 2021).

There is a specific protocol that the National Sports Tribunal follows when it comes to the topics that are decided by the tribunal. To begin the process of bringing a dispute to the National Sports Tribunal for resolution, an application must be submitted in the proper format to the competent authority of the tribunal. In general division, this application is made within the time given in the tribunal's rules, and if no deadline has been specified, the tribunal's CEO will make the decision. In the case of the anti-doping division, however, the deadline to file an application will be as per the anti-doping policy or 21 days after receiving the notice for the sports rules violation  (National Sports Tribunal, 2021). The authority then organises a preliminary meeting to determine the issue between the parties to the disagreement in the second step of this procedure, and the CEO then hears the matter. The hearing authority will then frame the issue between the parties. Then, on the next level, both parties will have the opportunity to present evidence and make any required arguments to support their case in the disputed matter. The National Sports Tribunal will then determine the case after reviewing all of the evidence presented by both parties, and a copy of the verdict will be issued to both parties (National Sports Tribunal, 2021).

If any of the parties to the dispute are not pleased after the matter has been resolved by the National Sports Tribunal for the first time, they have the right to submit an appeal with the National Sports Tribunal's appellate division. However, an appeal is not filed at the discretion of the party because there is a set time limit within which the appeal must be filed that is 30 days in general cases  (McLean, 2019).  However, in the case of anti-doping rules, the time limit for filing an appeal will be set by the anti-doping policy or 21 days in the case of anti-doping problems. For all other forms of disputes, the time limit is 30 days. Parties who were involved in the initially resolved matter will also be parties to the appeal, unless any other person is designated in the applicable sports policy or other approved people. When the matter first came before the National Sports Tribunal, there were several methods to settle the appeal matter, including hearing the parties in full or only considering the evidence that was submitted. In some situations, the rules of the sports tribunal offer a method for deciding the matter that has been appealed (National Sports Tribunal , 2021).

Process to decide the disputed matter

After considering the procedure of the tribunal or the official authority of the sports, it may be concluded that players and sports officials are disciplined by their sport's governing organisations for bringing the sport into disrepute. This disrepute clause in a sports official's or a sports club's contract raises concerns not just about its ill-defined and broad scope, but also about its propensity to stifle dissent and variety. Although, under the judicial review system, an individual who is dissatisfied with the judgement of the sports disciplinary tribunal can challenge the decision of such tribunal in court. The courts are often hesitant to participate in voluntary association internal conflicts and will not examine tribunal decisions to determine their legality (Melbourne University Law Review, 2021). The best way to decide these types of situations with the help of the court is to use the principle of no evidence as a defence. According to this concept, if an individual or a sports tribunal is dissatisfied with a particular sports tribunal's judgement, they must persuade the court that the decision was made in error because adequate evidence was not presented. This principle is the only option to bring a dispute before a court for judicial review; otherwise, a sport official or an aggrieved party by a sports tribunal ruling cannot seek a court to examine the decision on its merits. Dickason v Edwards is a case in which this principle was established. The High Judge stated in this case that the only reason a court may overturn a disciplinary committee's finding was if "no reasonable man could conclude that the facts established amounted to the offence charged under the rules." The Court would be hesitant to intervene if the committee "honestly arrived at the judgement that the conduct complained of was likely to bring discredit to the [society], and that conclusion is neither ridiculous nor unreasonable (HJones & homas, 2021)."

In the case study, if a conflict emerges between the members and the sports club, they can file a complaint with the National Sports Tribunal. Furthermore, if any of the parties to the dispute are not satisfied with the firstly resolved topic, they may submit an appeal with the tribunal's appellate division. However, in specific situations, a sports official may petition the court for judicial review if the concept of no evidence is met.

Breach of contract occurs when one or more parties to a contract fail to fulfil their contractual responsibilities or perform their duties as stated in the contract, according to the applicable requirements of contract law. In the matter of St George Soccer Football Association Inc v Soccer NSW Ltd, two Sydney soccer football clubs filed legal action against Soccer NSW Limited for breach of contract by excluding both clubs from the 2006 first-grade league. However, the Supreme Court dismissed such a soccer football club's argument about the existence of a "process contract" coming out of Soccer NSW's request, because the procedure involved was already covered under Soccer NSW's constitution, and the sporting club had made no successful arguments. As a result, the court dismissed the soccer football club's claim ( Douglas, 2021).  

Appeal to the National Sports Tribunal

The other party who has suffered a loss as a result of a breach of the contract's essential provisions will then have the option to terminate or continue the relationship. As a result, if the other non-violent party decides to keep the contract going, the violative party will be forced to fulfil his or her contractual obligations, which is known as particular performance of the contract. On the other hand, if the non-violating party wishes to terminate the contract or termination is provided in the contract, the violating party will be liable to pay damages to the other party if the case goes to court. Sometime the obligation on the termination of the contract is fixed in the contract and it is obligatory if it is not providing unfair advantage to one party over another (business.gov.au, 2021).

In the case study under discussion, there existed a contract between the parties (sports player or sports club) in which specific terms and conditions were written that both parties to the contract were expected to follow. Concerning the sports player, it was specified that the sports player would not get into any contract during his or her job term that would jeopardise the player's capacity to fulfil his or her contractual obligations. And if this occurs, it will be seen as a violation of the contract. The sports club has the authority to cancel the contract if the sports player fails to provide a remedy for the breach within 14 days, or if the player becomes insolvent. Similarly, if the sports club violates any of the contract's conditions, the player has the right to terminate the contract if the player fails to respond within 14 days or the sports club goes bankrupt.

So, it was an employment contract, and as mentioned in the contract, if a sports player goes to another club before the contract expires, it will make it impossible to fulfil the contract's obligations. As a result, it will be considered a breach of contract, and if the player does not correct his mistake within 14 days as stated in the contract, the club will have the right to terminate the contract and seek compensation under contract law provisions, as applicable to the location of the sports club. These contract terms and conditions would apply in this case because one party is not receiving unfair advantages over the other.

In most cases, the individual who owns the image or whose image it is has sole ownership of the image rights. Here, image rights in sports refer to the picture, name, signature, or any other distinguishing traits of a sports player that are protected from unauthorised use. It means that the sports player who appears in the image has the sole right to use or keep the image. And the other party has no right to utilise the image. However, if another individual uses such an image, it is deemed a violation of the player's or sportsperson's copyrights (World Intellectual Property Organisation, 2021).  However, this infringement of a player's image right has not been specified in intellectual property law. As a result, classic causes of action such as passing off, breach of Australian Consumer Law, defamation, trade mark and copyright infringement are used to safeguard the celebrity image. Despite this, the ATO has recognised image rights as contractual rights, meaning that if a sports player offers a third party a licence to exploit his or her image rights, it is not deemed a breach of the player's image rights. Since 2017, these practical compliance standards have been in place ( Heilbronn, 2017).

Judicial review for disputes in sports industry

The new draught Practical Compliance Guideline, which was just released, builds on prior judgements by allowing athletes to claim up to 10% of their earnings from their playing contract as coming from the "use and exploitation of their 'public renown' or 'image' under licence" in cases where:

• The athlete grants a non-exclusive licence to utilise and exploit their 'public celebrity' or 'image' to a private entity, most typically a trust or firm( Allen, et al., 2019).
• That entity has a contractual right to the proceeds from the use and exploitation of the athlete's "public celebrity" or "image"; and
• The payment is not derived from the licencing of copyright, trademarks, or registered design rights, which would ordinarily result in a fee( Heilbronn, 2018).

Sports Club PLC v Inspector of Taxes is one of the instances that analyse the provisions connected to the use of a player's image rights. The contract between the Arsenal Football Club and two of its players, David Platt and Dennis Bergkamp, was challenged by HMRC. HMRC was held responsible for the use of picture rights for the purpose of tax avoidance. However, after evaluating both parties' claims, the court found that picture rights were employed in accordance with commercially identifiable image rights, and hence were not taxable as player income.

As a result, in the case study provided, if the sports club wants the players to be on social media, such as Instagram or Tik-Tok, and wants to use the player's image rights for marketing and promotional activities, the sports club will be able to do so because the sports player has exclusively provided rights to the sports club through the proposed contract. The contract clearly states that the player grants the administrator non-exclusive permission to use his name or image in any medium for marketing and promotional purposes. So, if the sports club does it, the player has no legal recourse against the club.

References

Allen, J. et al., 2019. Festival and Special Event Management, Essentials Edition. s.l.:s.n.

Douglas, J., 2021. Types of Breach of Contract. [Online]
Available at:

https://legalvision.com.au/4-types-of-breach-of-contract/
[Accessed March 2022].

Heilbronn, C., 2017. Taxation Of Image Rights In Australia: Key Points For Athletes From The Brisbane Lions Decision`. [Online]
Available at:

https://www.lawinsport.com/topics/item/taxation-of-image-rights-in-australia-key-points-for-athletes-from-the-brisbane-lions-decision-2#:~:text=In%20Australia%2C%20a%20sportsperson%20does,use%20and%20exploit%20their%20image.
[Accessed March 2022].

Heilbronn, C., 2018. Safe harbour for image rights assessments of professional sportspersons has been withdrawn. [Online]
Available at:

https://www.minterellison.com/articles/safe-harbour-withdrawn-for-image-rights-assessments-of-professional-sportspersons
[Accessed March 2022].

Morrissey, M., 2019. Assignment of contract. [Online]
Available at:

https://morrisseylaw.com.au/assignment-vs-novation-what-is-the-difference/
[Accessed March 2022].

business.gov.au, 2021. End a contract. [Online]
Available at:

https://business.gov.au/products-and-services/contracts-and-tenders/end-a-contract#:~:text=When%20a%20contract%20can%20be%20terminated%20for%20breach%20of%20contract&text=The%20obligations%20under%20the%20contract,or%20keep%20the%20contract%20going.
[Accessed March 2022].

IPSA LOQUITUR, 2020. Linden Gardens Trust Ltd v Lenesta Sludge Disposal Ltd. [Online]
Available at:

https://ipsaloquitur.com/contract-law/cases/linden-gardens-trust-v-lenesta-sludge-disposal/
[Accessed March 2022].

Kennedy, . P., 2022. Leading gymnastics coach Peggy Liddick sanctioned for harassment of Olympic athlete. [Online]
Available at:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-02-04/gymnastics-coach-peggy-liddick-harassment/100802592
[Accessed March 2022].

McLean, H., 2019. Coercive powers for the new national sports tribunal: Could they be the silver bullet to strengthen integrity in Australian sport?. Australian and New Zealand Sports Law Journal, 13(1), pp. 37-50.

National Sports Tribunal , 2021. Appeals. [Online]
Available at:

https://www.nationalsportstribunal.gov.au/dispute-resolution-services/types-disputes-and-appeals/appeals#:~:text=You%20must%20appeal%20within%20a,the%20decision%2Fdetermination%20being%20appealed
[Accessed March 2022].

National Sports Tribunal, 2021. Our process. [Online]
Available at: https://www.nationalsportstribunal.gov.au/dispute-resolution-services/our-process
[Accessed March 2022].

National Sports Tribunal, 2021. Types of disputes and appeals- overview. [Online]
Available at: https://www.nationalsportstribunal.gov.au/dispute-resolution-services/types-disputes-and-appeals
[Accessed March 2022].

Natonal Sports Tribunal, 2020. Perth Heat v Canberra Cavalry and Baseball Australia. [Online]
Available at: https://www.nationalsportstribunal.gov.au/decisions/nst-e21-4222
[Accessed March 2022].

Sevil, C., 2021. What Is the Difference Between Assignment and Novation?. [Online]
Available at: https://legalvision.com.au/assignment-vs-novation-two-different-words-for-the-same-thing/
[Accessed March 2022].

World Intellectual Property Organisation, 2021. Understanding Sports Image Rights. [Online]
Available at: https://www.wipo.int/ip-outreach/en/ipday/2019/understanding_sports_image_rights.html
[Accessed March 2022].