“)a) An association or association shall promulgate bylaws regulating the proper management of the sport or sports that it is a center, including regulations regarding discipline, internal judgment, including the internal judicial institutions and the procedures under which they shall be discussed - subject to section 11, the transfer of athletes - subject to section 11a, as well as regarding the salaries and payments of athletes, coaches and other officials. "
- The legislature additionally and explicitly determined that the sole authority to discuss and decide matters related to activity within the framework of an association or sports association will be in the hands of the internal judicial institutions set out in section 10 of the Sports Law quoted above. Moreover, the legislature also determined that the judgments of the internal courts are final, and that they cannot be appealed to the court. In light of the importance of the matter, I will quote section 11(a) of the Sports Law in its entirety:
“)a) The exclusive authority to discuss and decide matters related to activity within the framework of an association or association will be in the hands of the internal judicial institutions set out in the bylaws under section 10, and in accordance with the provisions set forth in the bylaws under that section; The decisions of the highest internal court in disciplinary matters will be final and shall not be appealed before a court. " (my emphasis - G.H.).
- I note that the purpose of these provisions is to create professional internal judicial institutions, which will be able to provide a quick and efficient legal response to disputes and disputes in the field of association sports.
This purpose is realized in practice in the activity of these institutions. Thus, for example, it can be seen that in the case before me, only about two weeks passed from the day of the game to the judgment in the first instance.
- Against the background of this legislation, it would have been possible to believe that a case like the one before me, which is indisputably related to activity within the framework of the Association, would be heard only in the internal judicial institutions (as indeed was done) and that the judgment of the Supreme Court would be final, and would not be subject to judicial review by the regular courts.
However, the case law held that it is indeed not possible to appeal the judgments of the Supreme Court of Internal Jurisdiction (in our case, the Supreme Court), but that these rulings will be subject to "legal supervision of a different kind". In this regard, see the guiding judgment (given after the enactment of the Sports Law) in Civil Appeal 674/89 Dan Turten v. Israel Sports Association [published in the Nevo database] (March 28, 1991) (hereinafter: "the Turten case"):