PANEL: Judge Conny Jörneklint , President; Ms Sangeeta Mandal, Mr Hans Nater
FACTS:
On 28 April 2008, the Indian Olympic Association (“IOA”) temporarily suspended its recognition of the IHF. The IHF has challenged this decision in Indian courts. On 18 July 2008, officials of the FI and the IOA met in Hyderabad, India, and discussed, among other things, the formation of a new national governing body for hockey in India where IHF was not informed. On 29 November 2008, the FIH resolved that Hockey India should take over from the IHC as FIH member for India. On 20 May 2009, Hockey India was formally established. In June 2009 it was recognized by the FIH as its member for India, in place of the IHC. Around 10 May 2009, the IOA disaffiliated the IHF and the IWHF. The IHF expanded its challenge of the IOA’s temporary suspension. On 21 May 2010, the High Court of Delhi quashed the IOA’s decisions to withdraw recognition of the IHF. Then the IHF brought a complaint before the Judicial Committee of the FIH. The FIH resolved not to put the IHF’s and Hockey India’s competing claims before the FIH Congress in November 2012. On 14 March 2013, the FIH wrote to Mr Oswald to formally appoint him to chair the Oswald Committee. On 1 November 2014, the FIH Congress unanimously approved Hockey India as the FIH member for India.
ISSUES:
- Whether FIH applied wrong provisions for relief under Article 2.4(d)
- Whether IHF be recognized as the FIH Member for India
SUBMISSIONS BY APPELLANTS:
- That the FIH applied the incorrect Statutes and that it should have awaited the outcome of Indian proceedings.
- The FIH wrongly applied the Article 2.4(d) procedure
SUBMISSIONS BY RESPONDENTS:
- That the 2013 Statutes did not vary in substance to its previous rules. Such material changes in procedure were permitted
- That Article 2.4(d) did not require there to be a vacancy for it to be engaged
JUDGEMENT:
APPLICABILITY OF STATUTES BY FIH: As to the issue of improper motivation or bad faith, the Panel majority is of the view that even if there was a wish on the FIH’s part to have Hockey India, rather than the IHF, as its member, that wish does not make the changes to the rules substantively unfair
APPLICABILITY OF ARTICLE 2.4(d): the Panel does not think it helpful or necessary to form a concluded view on whether, as contended by the IHF, 1) the IHC was not validly derecognized and 2) the IHF was somehow successfully its successor for the purposes of FIH membership.
RECOGNITION OF IHF AS FIH MEMBER OF INDIA: The IHF in its oral submissions did not seek to persuade the court to decide the matter de novo, but instead encouraged it to the remit the matter to the JCP Panel on terms that panel adjudicate the parties’ competing claims pursuant to the Old Statutes
The appeal filed by the Indian Hockey Federation on 28 November 2014 is dismissed. The decision of the International Hockey Federation Congress dated 1 November 2014 is confirmed.
