⚖️ MatchPoint Talk: Basque Pelota and Sports Law. The CAS Award and the international recognition of sub-national sports federations.
The recent decision by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) regarding Basque Pelota marks a turning point in international sports law.
In this new edition of MatchPoint Talks, we will analyze the CAS award and its legal implications for sports federations and global sports governance.
The session will offer a rigorous examination of the limits of sports arbitration and the international standing of disciplines with deep-rooted historical heritage, within an increasingly complex institutional and regulatory framework.
We are pleased to feature Juan Carlos Soto Del Castillo (Soka Abogados), who will provide his specialized expertise to contextualize the case and analyze its legal consequences regarding the international recognition of sub-national sports federations.
The debate regarding the international recognition of sub-national federations has taken on a new dimension following the reform of the Spanish Sports Law (Article 48), which enabled federations with deep-rooted historical or social heritage to apply for direct membership in international bodies.
This legislative shift triggered a paradigm-shifting case: the application of the Basque Pelota Federation (Federación de Euskadi) to join the International Federation (FIPV). Following the approval of its admission at the General Assembly on December 28, 2024, the Spanish Federation appealed the decision before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).
In this session of MatchPoint Talks, we analyze the outcome of this conflict with Juan Carlos Soto del Castillo (Soka Abogados), the counsel who co-led the defense alongside Jorge Ibarrola.
On January 20, 2026, the CAS issued an award declining its jurisdiction. This means the tribunal did not rule on the merits of the case, leaving the international assembly’s agreements in force.
For professionals interested in the international recognition of sub-national federations, the legal reasoning behind this decision is vital:
The defense argued that not all FIPV agreements were subject to CAS arbitration. While disciplinary files (vertical relationship) had a clear arbitration clause (Art. 58 of the old statutes), the current dispute was a controversy between national federations (horizontal relationship) regarding an assembly admission decision.
As the FIPV is headquartered in Pamplona but submitted to arbitration in Switzerland (CAS seat), the tribunal applied Swiss Law to interpret the arbitration clause. The conclusion was decisive, reinforcing the jurisprudence of the Swiss Federal Tribunal:
“Submission to arbitration implies waiving the right to ordinary courts and, therefore, must be clear and conscious. If there is doubt regarding whether a matter (such as member admission) is appealable to CAS, it is understood that it is not submitted.”
In the absence of such unequivocal clarity in the statutes for this specific type of conflict, the CAS declared itself incompetent.
Beyond litigation, this case highlights the importance of history and social will within private entities. Soto explains that the FIPV was founded in 1929 in Buenos Aires with a strong Basque presence, which facilitated the current assembly—the “Basque Pelota family”—voting in favor of integration by a qualified majority (two-thirds).
The expert underscores a key governance lesson: “An award cannot force entry where you are not wanted.” The success of international recognition in this case did not depend solely on the law, but on diplomacy and acceptance by the international assembly as a sovereign private entity.
This case demonstrates that mastery of federation statutes, Swiss regulations, and arbitration procedures is fundamental. At SportsLawHub, we connect you directly with the lawyers leading these high-stakes cases.
