LEX MERCATORIA AND LEX SPORTIVA: PECULIARITIES, SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES

International law rules with regard to the regulation of sports activities at the universal and regional levels developed by states and international intergovernmental organizations have formed a set of norms ensuring international cooperation in the field of sport, namely, international sports law.What is the nature of the set of rules governing cross-border relations in the field of sport? They are mainly the result of rule-making carried out by the International Olympic Committee (the IOC) and the international Olympic Sports Federations. The article analyzes the approaches proposed by Western authors and applicable to the solution of the issue under consideration, elucidates the main provisions of the concepts of unified law governing relations between groups proposed by Georges Scelle, transnational law proposed by Phillip C. Jessup, and true international law proposed by C. Vedder.However, the best explanation for the interaction between national sports associations and international nongovernmental organizations of the Olympic Movement is provided by lex sportiva. Lex sportiva is similar to lex mercatoria that is used to regulate international trade. Both complexes have such properties as normativeness, non-systematicity, autonomy in the regulation and resolution of disputes. However, lex sportiva is characterized by a greater degree of institutionalization than lex mercatoria. There are two factors that contribute hereto: a pyramidal structure of the Olympic movement and activities of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) in Lausanne that was founded in 1983 at the IOC initiative. A greater degree of institutionalization of lex sportiva provides the right method for selection of norms and contributes to a stronger regulatory order in the field of Olympic sport.At the present stage, there is a tendency whereby the law created by States perceives useful designs that have arisen in non-legal regulatory complexes giving them legal effect. Therefore, modern lawyers should familiarize themselves with the content of the norms and rules emerging in non-legal complexes in areas of their concern in order to foresee what impact such norms can have on the development of the legal norms in the near future.