Specificity of arbitration in sports law

Sport represents a social and economic phenomenon in continuous development, with an important contribution to the fulfillment of national strategic objectives, especially those regarding solidarity and prosperity. Being a dynamic sector in continuous growth, with a macro economic impact, however underestimated, sport can contribute to economic sustainability and job creation, thus serving as a tool for local and regional development, including urban or rural regeneration. At the same time, an increasing part of the economic value of sport is related to intellectual property rights, namely copyright, the right to communications and trademarks, and last but not least the right to the image and broadcasting rights. In this context, sport is seen as a business, in which the following can be involved: athletes, coaches, clubs, managers, sponsors, sports betting houses and which, through the exercise of contract obligations, are in close connection with direct consumers, respectively, with those who set in motion this whole mechanism. Along with the regulation of sports activity, the establishment of institutional and competitive rules, rights and obligations for its participating actors, of course, situations of conflict, regulatory violations and other disputes may also arise. Thus, the need for the existence of a sports jurisdiction has arisen which, through a judicial body, will resolve these disputes in the spirit of sports fairness and the legislation in force. As a result, these disputes can be resolved through the arbitration institution, independently of the state bodies (courts), so that the principle of the autonomy of sport is respected. The purpose of the research is to present some scientific benchmarks regarding refereeing in sports. The methods used in the research are those relevant to the scientific study of the scientific specialized research and enshrined in the legal methodology, respectively analytical methods (which will involve the study of some legal norms that regulate the criminalization framework of an act), synthetically (which will involve the establishment of some national/international and brief doctrinal jurisprudential knowledge and information), logical (using deductive reasoning), quantitative and qualitative (reflects the fact that the rules for carrying out certain operations or procedures are adopted precisely by assessing the number and type of cases encountered in jurisprudence). Findings and results. Arbitration Agreement constitutes the starting point in the settlement of a sports dispute through the arbitration institution. Normally, in order for a dispute to be settled through sports arbitration, the parties must agree, which can be achieved through an arbitration agreement/clause. In sports, the arbitration clause is not consensual, but more hastily imposed. For example, the arbitration clause may or may not exist in a contract between an athlete and a club, but if it does not exist - expressis verbis - it does not mean that any dispute will necessarily be subject to national courts, but it will also be able to be resolved through arbitration. This is possible by referring to the statutes of the national federations, which include in the internal regulations express provisions regarding arbitration, in the sense that this is the only way to resolve disputes. The Sports Arbitration Institution recognized internationally and accredited by all international sports organizations to settle disputes in the field of sports is the Court of Sports Arbitration. This, also called the Court of Arbitration for Sport, represents an independent authority of the sports forums, which participates through arbitration or mediation in resolving disputes in the field of sports. In the context in which sport is not a field that is eminently linked to a certain jurisdiction (we are talking about international competitions and events) and as the conflicts resulting from the ever-increasing importance of this "business", it had to be found a possibility of solving them at the international level. This is how the Court of Arbitration for Sports from Lausanne (The Court of Arbitration for Sports) was born, in Loussanne, Switzerland, under the auspices of the International Olympic Committee, being the first arbitral tribunal specialized in sports disputes. Sports disputes have always been resolved by bodies with jurisdictional powers, internal bodies created by the federations through the statutory provisions and which prohibit any appeal before common law courts. These decisions adopted by the arbitral institutions are enforced, even if the decision is not pronounced by the court of common law, which highlights the power of the sports authority that can decide, without an actual trial taking place, but respecting the right to defense, according to the institutionalized rules. In this context, we can state that, sports justice presents itself today as a jurisdictional system based on both legal and sports norms, governed by the classic principles of the fair process and made up of all jurisdictional commissions with genuine competences in the sports juris - dictio. The organization of sports activity and its practice, like all human activities, is not without controversies, contestations or disputes. The sports movement has as its main objective the resolution of disputes within it, without the exposure of going "into the open". Concluding, we can affirm that the risks of settling sports disputes outside the sports jurisdictions are obvious, and the reasons are multiple: understanding the nature and specifics of the dispute, the duration of the proceedings, avoiding court fees, the possibility of "choosing" the judge etc. Therefore, sports litigation includes two complementary facets, each with its own field of reference and its own stake, which call for different legitimate solutions in internal jurisdictional proceedings. The dynamics of the sports movement and the issues related to sports led to the need to connect the federal statutory provisions with the evolution of the sports reality. Moreover, from the perspective of federal justice and the desire to maintain it within the intra-federal framework, the federations understood that it is imperative to ensure a fair justice so that affiliated members are induced with the idea of an impartial, professional and functional justice, eliminating the temptation " of going out into the open", that is, of seeking justice in common justice.