Data
- Date:
- 15-12-2011
- Country:
- Germany
- Number:
- 2-13 O 302/10
- Court:
- Landgericht Frankfurt
- Parties:
- Unknown German athlete vs German Sport Association
Keywords
DISPUTE BETWEEN A GERMAN ATHLETE AND THE GERMAN SPORT ASSOCIATION - UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS A MEANS OF INTERPRETING DOMESTIC LAW (GERMAN LAW)
CONTRA PROFERENTEM RULE - GENERAL PRINCIPLE OF INTERPRETATION - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 4.6 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
Abstract
Claimant, a German athlete, brought an action against Defendant, the German Sport Association, for damages resulting from the latter’s refusal to nominate Claimant participant in the 2008 Olympic Games in Beijing. According to Claimant he was entitled to such nomination since he had met the qualification requirements established in Defendant’s rules for the nomination of the German Olympic Team (the “Rules”) by achieving twice the required sport result, though in one and the same competition. Defendant objected that, although the Rules did not specify that the sport results in question were to be achieved in different competitions, they were to be understood in that sense.
Claimant first brought an action before the German Court of Arbitration for Sport which decided in his favour by applying the general principle of interpretation according to which if terms supplied by one party are unclear there is a preference for their interpretation against that party, and in support of its finding expressly referred to Article 4.6 of the UNIDROIT Principles (see UNILEX, Award of Deutsches Sportschiedsgericht 17. 12.2009). The Court of First Instance decided likewise citing the decision of the Court of Arbitration for Sport and its reference to Article 4.6 of the UNIDROIT Principles.
Fulltext
Full text available at http://openjur.de/u/308054.html}}
Source
}}