• Home
  • RSS Feeds
  • Blog Archives
Subscribe to Disputing
Book an ADR Service
Call Karl Bayer
Karl Bayer's Disputing Blog - Mediator, Arbitrator, Court Master & Technical Advisor
About Karl  |  Book an ADR Service  |  Contact Karl   (214) 891-4505

Menu 
  • home
  • Mediation
  • Arbitration
  • Court Neutrals
  • Online Dispute Resolution
  • Technology
    • Intellectual Property
    • Privacy and Cybersecurity
    • E-discovery
  • Court Decisions
    • Texas Supreme Court
    • Fifth Circuit
    • Third Court of Appeals
    • U.S. Supreme Court
  • More
    • Legislation
      • Texas
      • United States
    • Healthcare
    • Guest Posts
      • John DeGroote
      • John C. Fleming
      • Rick Freeman
      • Professor Peter Friedman
      • Honorable W. Royal Furgeson, Jr.
      • James M. Gaitis
      • Laura A. Kaster
      • Professor John Lande
      • Philip J. Loree, Jr.
      • Michael McIlwrath
      • F. Peter Phillips
      • Professor Alan Scott Rau
      • Professor Thomas J. Stipanowich
      • Professor S.I. Strong
      • Richard Webb
      • Glen M. Wilkerson
    • International arbitration
    • Regulation
    • Sports and Entertainment


USADA Case against Lance Armstrong | USADA Adjudication Process Part IV | The Arbitration Hearing

0
by Victoria VanBuren

Wednesday, Jul 25, 2012


Tweet

by Renée Kolar

Jurisdiction

The arbitrator(s) has the power to rule on his or her own jurisdiction, including any objections with respect to the existence, scope or validity of the arbitration agreement. See AAA Supplementary Procedure for the Arbitration of Olympic Sport Doping Disputes, Annex D of USADA Protocol [hereinafter AAA Supplementary Procedure], R-7. The arbitration clause shall be treated as an agreement independent of the other terms of the contract. Id.

Procedure

Provided the parties are treated with equality and that each party has the right to be heard and is given a fair opportunity to present its case, the arbitrator(s) has the discretion to vary the procedure and may direct the order of proof, bifurcate proceedings and direct the parties to focus their presentations on issues the decision of which could dispose of all or part of the case. Id. at R-27. The arbitrator may take whatever interim measures he or she deems necessary. Id. at R-31

A party can make any new or different claim, before the arbitrator or arbitral panel has been selected. Id at R-5. However, after the arbitrator or panel is appointed, admission of new or different claims is within the discretion of the arbitrator(s). Id.

Except as may be mutually agreed by the parties or upon the request of a single party for good cause as may be determined by the arbitrator, the hearing, including any briefing ordered by the arbitrator, shall be completed within three (3) months of the appointment of the arbitrator AAA Supplementary Procedure, R-19.

Evidence

The arbitrator(s) do not need to conform to legal rules of evidence. Id. at R_28. The arbitrator(s) may only retain an expert or seek independent evidence if agreed to by the parties and (i) the parties agree to pay for the cost of such expert or independent evidence or (ii) the USOC agrees to pay for the cost of such expert or independent evidence. Id.

The parties shall have the right to examine any expert retained by the arbitrator and shall have the right to respond to any independent evidence obtained by the arbitrator. Id. Witnesses for each party shall also submit to questions from the arbitrator as well as the adverse party. Id. An arbitrator or other person authorized by law to subpoena witnesses or documents may do so upon the request of any party or independently. Id.

Confidentiality

USADA shall not Publicly Disclose or comment upon any Athlete’s Adverse Analytical Finding or Atypical Finding or upon any information related to any alleged doping violation (including violations not involving an Adverse Analytical Finding) until after the Athlete or other Person (1) has been found to have committed an anti-doping rule violation in a hearing conducted under the USADA Protocol, or (2) has failed to request a hearing within the time set forth, or (3) has agreed in writing to the sanction sought by USADA. AAA Supplementary Procedure, R-16. However, USADA may provide notification to the USOC, NGB, IF, WADA, an event organizer or team selecting entity (or other sporting body ordering the test) as provided for in the USADA Protocol. Id.

Award

The award must be a written reasoned award signed by a majority of the arbitrators. Id. at R-39. The arbitrator may grant any remedy or relief that the arbitrator deems just and equitable and within the scope of the World Anti-Doping Code, International Federation Rules, the USADA Protocol or the USOC Anti-Doping Policies. Id. at R-40. In addition to a final award, the arbitrator may make other decisions, including interim, interlocutory, or partial rulings, orders, and awards. Id.

Expedited procedure

At the request of any party, any time period set forth in the AAA Supplementary Procedure rules may be shortened by the arbitrator(s) where doing so is reasonably necessary to resolve any athlete’s eligibility before a protected competition, while continuing to protect the right of an athlete charged with an anti-doping rule violation to a fair hearing. Id. at R-6.

If a request to expedite the adjudication process is made before the appointment of the arbitrator(s), the AAA shall randomly select one arbitrator from the Arbitrator Pool to determine whether the adjudication process shall be expedited and the schedule pursuant to which the process shall proceed. Id. at R-6. This randomly selected arbitrator shall not sit on the panel. AAA Supplementary Procedure, R-6.

If the request to expedite the process is made after the arbitration panel has been appointed, the panel shall determine whether the adjudication process shall be expedited and the schedule pursuant to which the process shall proceed. Id. The AAA shall immediately notify the Athlete Ombudsman and the USOC General Counsel’s office of any arbitration that may be or has been initiated under these expedited procedures. Id

Related Posts:

  • USADA Case against Lance Armstrong | USADA Adjudication Process Part III | The Appointment of Arbitrators, Disputing, July 24, 2012
  • USADA Case against Lance Armstrong | USADA Adjudication Process Part II | The Review Board Track, Disputing, July 23, 2012
  • Armstrong v. Tygart | USADA Files Motion to Dismiss Lance Armstrong’s Suit , Disputing, July 21, 2012
  • USADA Case against Lance Armstrong | USADA Adjudication Process Part I | USADA ‘Results Management,’ Disputing, July 19, 2012
  • Armstrong v. Tygart | Texas Federal Court Will Hear Lance Armstrong Case on August 10, Disputing, July 18, 2012
  • Armstrong v. Tygart | Lance Armstrong’s Suit and Restraining Order against USADA, Disputing, July 17, 2012
  • USADA Case against Lance Armstrong | What is the USADA? Disputing, July 16, 2012
  • USADA Case against Lance Armstrong | USADA Allegations, Disputing, July 13, 2012
  • Lance Armstrong | The Doping Controversy Continues, Disputing, July 12, 2012

Renée Kolar is a summer intern at Karl Bayer, Dispute Resolution Expert . Renée is a J.D. candidate at The University of Texas School of Law and holds an undergraduate degree in Applied Foreign Languages from l’Université Stendhal in Grenoble, France.

 

Related Posts

  • USADA Case against Lance Armstrong | USADA Adjudication Process Part VI | Right to Appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS)USADA Case against Lance Armstrong | USADA Adjudication Process Part VI | Right to Appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS)
  • USADA Case against Lance Armstrong | USADA Adjudication Process Part III | The Appointment of ArbitratorsUSADA Case against Lance Armstrong | USADA Adjudication Process Part III | The Appointment of Arbitrators
  • USADA Case against Lance Armstrong | USADA Adjudication Process Part II | The Review Board TrackUSADA Case against Lance Armstrong | USADA Adjudication Process Part II | The Review Board Track
  • Armstrong v. Tygart | USADA Files Motion to Dismiss Lance Armstrong’s SuitArmstrong v. Tygart | USADA Files Motion to Dismiss Lance Armstrong’s Suit
  • USADA Case against Lance Armstrong | What is the USADA?USADA Case against Lance Armstrong | What is the USADA?
  • UCI Recognizes Sanctions against Lance ArmstrongUCI Recognizes Sanctions against Lance Armstrong

Like this article? Share it!


  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
    LinkedIn

  • Click to share on X (Opens in new window)
    X

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
    Facebook

  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
    Pinterest

  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
    Email
About Victoria VanBuren

Born and raised in Mexico, Victoria is a native Spanish speaker and a graduate of the Monterrey Institute of Technology (Instituto Tecnologico y de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey), or "the MIT of Latin America." She concentrated in physics and mathematics. Immediately after completing her work at the Institute, Victoria moved to Canada to study English and French. On her way back to Mexico, she landed in Dallas and managed to have her luggage lost at the airport. Charmed by the Texas hospitality, she decided to stay and made her way back to Austin, which she's adopted as home.

Legal Research

Legal Research

Connect with Disputing

Visit Us On LinkedinCheck Our Feed

About Disputing

Disputing is published by Karl Bayer, a dispute resolution expert based in Austin, Texas. Articles published on Disputing aim to provide original insight and commentary around issues related to arbitration, mediation and the alternative dispute resolution industry.

To learn more about Karl and his team, or to schedule a mediation or arbitration with Karl’s live scheduling calendar, visit www.karlbayer.com.

About Disputing

Disputing is published by Karl Bayer, a dispute resolution expert based in Austin, Texas. Articles published on Disputing aim to provide original insight and commentary around issues related to arbitration, mediation and the alternative dispute resolution industry.

To learn more about Karl and his team, or to schedule a mediation or arbitration with Karl’s live scheduling calendar, visit www.karlbayer.com.

Recent Posts

We're Back!!!!
Feb 24, 2025
JAMS Welcomes Karl Bayer to its Panel of Neutrals
JAMS Welcomes Karl Bayer to its Panel of Neutrals
May 28, 2024
Class Action Waivers in Arbitration Agreements: The Twenty-First Century Arbitration Battleground and Implications for the EU Countries
Nov 27, 2023

Featured Posts

Tips on Taking Good Remote Depositions From a Veteran Court Reporter

Online Mediation May Allow Restorative Justice to Continue During COVID-19

Remote Arbitration Best Practices: Witness Examination

Search

Legal Research

Legal Research


© 2025, Karl Bayer. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy