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

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

3. 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)

4. 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)

5. 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)

6. 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

7. 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

8. 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)

9. 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

10. 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

11. Thank you