Not in My Name! Claudia Pechstein and the Post-Consensual Foundations of the Court of Arbitration for Sport

Abstract

In whose name?" do international courts adjudicate is the fundamental question posed by Armin von Bogdandy and Ingo Venzke. 1 In the present chapter, I aim to transpose some of their reflections to the context of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).To illustrate the suitability of this transposition, I will focus on the decisions rendered by the Landgericht (LG) and the Oberlandesgericht (OLG) München and by the Bundesgerichtshof (BGH) in a highly publicized dispute involving Claudia Pechstein, a famous German speed-skater and Olympic champion.2 The case will now potentially move to the Bundesverfassungsgericht.Von Bogdandy and Venzke's first fundamental claim is that international courts are multifunctional.By that they mean that international courts "transcend the one-dimensional fixation on dispute settlement" 3 .They argue that courts also stabilize normative expectations, are instruments of lawmaking, and a means to control and legitimize public authority.4 Additionally, they suggest that international courts exercise international public authority.They define public authority as "the ability, grounded in law, to restrict the freedom of other actors, or to shape their use of freedom in a similar way" 5 .From a descriptive standpoint, I contend

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 21 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.