Ben Rutherford IRB Legal Counsel Rugby Dispute Resolution Systems Arbitration Ireland Conference Friday, 7 November 2014 Dublin Ben Rutherford IRB Legal Counsel

IRB Governance Structure for dispute resolution purposes Legislature: IRB Council → IRB Regulations Committee Judiciary: Independent Judicial Panel Chairman → Independent Judicial Panel

Principle areas of dispute resolution Anti-Doping (IRB Regulation 21) On-field Discipline (IRB Regulation 17) Off-field Discipline (IRB Regulation 20) Anti-Corruption and Betting (IRB Regulation 6) Eligibility (IRB Regulation 8) Player Status and Movement (IRB Regulation 4) Breaches of IRB Regulations/Bye Laws by Unions (IRB Regulations 2 & 18) Judicial powers and procedures (IRB Regulation 18)

Appointment of Arbitrators Independent Judicial Panel Chairman Independent Judicial Panel Judicial Officer / Judicial Committee: All cases save for Eligibility Criteria: Member of Judicial Panel Neutral, independent and no prior involvement with case JPC power to co-opt persons with specialist expertise to sit as Judicial Officers / Judicial Committee No power for parties to select arbitrators  Neutral panel of Regulations Committee: Eligibility cases (through regulatory interpretation jurisdiction)

Adversarial v Inquisitorial (Largely) Adversarial: Anti-Doping Misconduct Anti-Corruption and Betting Breaches of other Regulations by Unions Inquisitorial: On-field Discipline Eligibility Player Status and Movement (between Clubs/Unions)

Principles General principles of natural justice and procedural fairness Regulations enshrine: Right to know allegations Right to be heard and present case Right to representation Impartial arbitrator Decisions not quashed by dint of minor procedural irregularities save for where leads to a miscarriage of justice or raises a material doubt as to reliability of findings/decision

Powers of Arbitrator (Judicial Officer / Judicial Committee) Wide discretion to regulate their own procedures provided principles complied with Pre-hearing conferences / directions Receive evidence in such form as see fit (including hearsay with caution) Power to direct any person to attend as a witness / expert witness Absolute discretion in relation to costs Decisions binding globally save for successful appeal

Standard of proof: Location: Balance of probabilities Comfortable satisfaction (Anti-Doping per WADA) Location: Location where dispute arose or at convenience of IRB/Tournament Organiser (e.g., 6 Nations – Heathrow) Technology widely used (especially Anti-Doping)

Appeals High threshold for appeals to be successful "Manifestly wrong", "in error (as to central findings of fact or in law)", "unduly lenient" De novo restricted to where in interests of justice (e.g. record unavailable, witness previously unavailable or unable to participate) Appeal Officer/Committee discretion to conduct proceedings as sees fit in keeping with natural justice principles Further appeal stage to CAS in Anti-Doping and Olympic eligibility

Advantages Timely (especially for Sevens disciplinary cases) Generally very low cost Decisions in hands of independent persons with expertise and understanding of Game Relatively simple systems able to be replicated at regional/national level High level of consistency across spectrum of international to local cases Limited number of appeals (particularly spurious appeals) Broad confidence in system across the Game IRB ability to supervise local application of Regulations to increase consistency

Thank you