Collegio di Garanzia Decision No. 63/2025 – Two Key Legal Principles in Sports Justice

With Decision No. 63/2025, published on 14 July 2025, the Collegio di Garanzia of the Italian National Olympic Committee (CONI) issued two significant legal principles in the field of sports justice. The case was followed directly by our firm.

1. Proper Notification and the Role of the Federal Prosecutor’s Office

In response to a preliminary objection raised by the respondent Federation—claiming nullity of the appeal due to a failure to notify the Federal Prosecutor’s Office—the Collegio di Garanzia clarified that the Federal Prosecutor’s Office operates as an integral part of the Federation itself. Accordingly, once an appeal is correctly notified—or, as provided in Article 59(1) of the Sports Justice Code (CGS), “transmitted”—to the relevant Sports Federation, the adversarial process is deemed to have been properly and fully established.

At the same time, the Board encouraged the sports legislator to intervene and provide greater clarity in the Sports Justice Code on this point, recognizing a lack of precision in the current regulatory framework.

2. Evaluation of Evidence and Judicial Review

On the merits, the Collegio di Garanzia articulated key principles concerning the evaluation (or omission thereof) of evidence by the Federal Justice Bodies. In particular, it affirmed the Board’s authority to intervene when such bodies fail to assess decisive evidence that could have led to a different outcome.

The decision underscores that judicial review by the Collegio di Garanzia is warranted when lower bodies neglect to address a crucial point of the case due to unexamined evidence—especially when such evidence might invalidate the effectiveness of the findings that formed the basis of the original ruling. As stated:

“Judicial review by the Collegio di Garanzia is appropriate where Federal Justice Bodies omit reasoning on a decisive issue due to the failure to examine a key piece of evidence—particularly when that evidence substantiates facts capable of invalidating the effectiveness of other evidentiary findings that shaped the lower court’s reasoning, thus rendering the decision’s rationale unfounded”
(Collegio di Garanzia, Section IV, Decision No. 30/2016).

Favorable Outcome for Our Client

On these grounds, the Collegio di Garanzia upheld the appeal filed by our firm on behalf of a member—candidate for the presidency of a Regional Committee—against the decision of the Federal Court of Appeal that punished him with a 1-year suspension for having allegedely threatened the rival in the election. The latter had entirely failed to evaluate critical evidence that “could have led to a different assessment of the disputed facts.” The Board firmly censured the appellate court’s conduct, describing it as “clearly contradictory and, in certain respects, illogical.”

This ruling represents a meaningful step forward in ensuring fairness, due process, and consistent interpretation of procedural norms within the realm of sports justice.

(Collegio di Garanzia, Section IV, Decision No. 63/2025)