| 篇名 |
自治語境下世界運動禁藥管制規則的法解釋學分析──以兩起結果相反的拒檢案件為切入點 |
| 並列篇名 |
A Legal Hermeneutic Analysis of World Anti-Doping Rules in Sports Autonomy—Starting from Two Cases of Refusing to Submit to Sample Collection |
| 作者 |
宋連斌、武振國 |
| 中文摘要 |
能否用標準更為嚴格的內國法解釋世界運動禁藥管制規則，是「世界運動禁藥管制機構訴孫楊和國際游泳總會案」提出的一個重要問題。為了實現公平競技的目標，有必要無差別地打擊興奮劑違規行為，對世界運動禁藥管制規則作統一解釋。對此，《世界運動禁藥管制規範》規定：「本規範應作為一個獨立和自治的文本來解釋，不能依據各簽約方或政府的法律或規則。」也就是說，世界運動禁藥管制規則和內國法相互平行，前者的解釋獨立於後者，應按照契約解釋的一般原理進行。具體而言，按照文義解釋規則，優先考慮當事人共同的主觀意願，不能確定當事各方意思表示交集的，方可根據「知情理性第三人」在重構締約環境下的理解作出推導。文義不明或採用第一種路徑將產生不合理結果的，應根據締約目的，在文義之外另作適當解讀。 |
| 英文摘要 |
Whether it is possible to apply the stricter state laws to the interpretation of sample collection provisions is an important issue. Article 24.3 of the World Anti-Doping Code provides that “The Code shall be interpreted as an independent and autonomous text and not by reference to the existing law or statutes of the Signatories or governments.” That is to say, World Anti-Doping Program and state laws parallel to each other, the former’s interpretation does not depend on the latter, but rather on the general principles of contract interpretation. The judge should apply the rules of literal interpretation and give priority to the common will of the parties. When different parties have different understandings toward a contract term, the judge should seek the meaning of the contract term as a reasonable person in the contracting circumstance. When neither side of the parties invests any special meanings into the contract term, the judge can reveal the term’s meaning in accordance with the objective and reasonable standard rather than the parties’ intentions. |
| 起訖頁 |
125-141 |
| 關鍵詞 |
國際體育仲裁、運動禁藥管制規則、採樣條款、體育自治、International Sports Arbitration、Anti-doping Rules、Sample Collection Provisions、Sports Autonomy |
| 刊名 |
月旦法學雜誌 |
| 出版單位 |
元照出版公司
|
| 期數 |
202306 (337期) |
| DOI |
10.53106/1025593133708 複製DOI DOI申請 |
| QRCode |
 |
| |
