Proceedings opened against Blerim Dzemaili
A decision in the case of UK Anti-Doping (UKAD) against Amir Khan has been issued by the National Anti-Doping Panel.
The CFRP has ratified the Agreed Decision between the EFL and Reading Football Club.
Sanctions: Guk Natalya (bodybuilding)
Santions: Pugacheva Ekaterina (kayak/canoe)
AAA Arbitrator Imposes One-Year Sanction on Table Tennis Athlete Kanak Jha for Anti-Doping Rule Violation
Czernuszka V King: Rugby Player Found Negligently Liable For “Revenge Tackle”
Published Monday, 20 March 2023.
U.S. Wrestling Athlete Jordan Oliver Accepts Sanction for Second Anti-Doping Rule Violation
The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) reduces the Period of Inegibility of Oleg Verniaiev to Two Years
The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) has issued its decision in the appeal arbitration between the Ukrainian gymnast Oleg Verniaiev (the Athlete), the Gymnastics Ethics Foundation (GEF) and the International Gymnastics Federation (FIG) relating to the decision issued by GEF Disciplinary Commission dated 12 July 2021 (the Challenged Decision) in which the Athlete was found to have breached Art. 10.2.1.1 of the FIG Anti-Doping Rules (“ADR”) (presence of Meldonium in his urine sample of 26 August 2020) and sanctioned with a four-year period of ineligibility starting on 5 November 2020.
The CAS Panel partially upheld the appeal and reduced the four-year period of ineligibility to two years, still commencing on 5 November 2020, which was the first day of the Athlete’s provisional suspension.
On 26 August 2020, the Athlete was the subject of an out of competition doping control test. Laboratory analysis of the urine sample provided by the Athlete revealed the presence of Meldonium, a prohibited substance under the 2020 World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) Prohibited List (hormone and metabolic modulators). On 5 November 2020, the Athlete was informed of the Adverse Analytical Finding (AAF) and accepted a provisional suspension. Following an investigation, on 12 July 2021, the GEF Disciplinary Commission issued the Challenged Decision.
During the CAS proceedings the Athlete submitted that the source of the Meldonium was contaminated food products, requested that the Challenged Decision be annulled, and that the period of ineligibility be reduced. On 15 December 2022, the CAS Panel held a hearing with the parties by video conference.
Following the hearing, the Panel deliberated and concluded that while the ADRV was upheld there was grounds for a reduction in the period of ineligibility from four years to two years. Accordingly, the Athlete was subject to a two-year period of ineligibility starting on 5 November 2020 which has now concluded.
Why FIFA Banned The All India Football Federation & What It Means
Published Friday, 24 February 2023.
Juventus FC Secures Landmark Ruling Securing Trade Mark Rights For NFTs
Published Monday, 13 February 2023.
What Constitutes ‘Assault’ On Football Referees & How Is It Punished? (Curran v London County FA)
Published Thursday, 02 February 2023.
An Overview Of Spain’s New Sports Law
Published Thursday, 26 January 2023.
Swiss Federal Tribunal confirms the validity of CAS Anti-Doping Division proceedings as first instance tribunal
Published Friday, 13 January 2023.
A Summary Of 2022’s Key Sports Law Cases & Regulatory Reforms From The CAS & SFT
Published Friday, 23 December 2022.
A Summary of Key Sports Law Cases In Australia in 2022
Published Thursday, 22 December 2022.
Betting In Football: Lessons From Non-League Player’s 11 Year Suspension (The FA v Kynan Isaac)
Published Thursday, 15 December 2022.
NFL’s Personal Conduct Policy Procedure Put To The Test (The Deshaun Watson Case)
Published Friday, 09 December 2022.
What does the Genius v Sportradar settlement mean for sports data rights holders?
Published Thursday, 01 December 2022.
Why The Nigerian National Sports Industry Policy 2022/26 Represents A Bold Statement Of Intent
Published Tuesday, 29 November 2022.
Ecuador’s World Cup Player Eligibility Fight – A Review Of The Byron Castillo Case
Published Thursday, 24 November 2022.
Fighting Doping In Sport: How Spain's Bureaucracy Is Undermining The Athlete Biological Passport
Published Friday, 11 November 2022.
The difficulties of athlete selection appeals: Key Considerations For Governing Bodies
Published Wednesday, 09 November 2022.
Court of Arbitration for Sport dismisses challenge by Mexican Swimming Federation against establishment of Stabilization Committee
Incident of Misconduct - Crowd Control Nuneaton Borough FC, Southern League
A decision in the case of World Athletics (WA) against Eglay Nalyanya has been issued by the Disciplinary Tribunal.
The CAS confirms the life ban imposed on Rosnick Grant, Former Vice-President of the Haitian Football Federation, following acts of harassment and sexual abuse
In the proceedings between Mr Rosnick Grant and the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA), the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) has decided to confirm the life ban imposed on Mr Rosnick Grant, former Vice-President and Head of Referees of the Haitian Football Federation (FHF), by the Adjudicatory Chamber of the FIFA Ethics Committee for violation of Article 23 (protection of physical and mental integrity) and Article 25 (abuse of power) of the FIFA Code of Ethics in connection with acts of harassment, sexual abuse, threats and coercion against female referees. The fine of CHF 100,000 initially imposed on Mr Rosnick Grant was reduced to CHF 35,000.
In May 2020, the Investigatory Chamber of the FIFA Ethics Committee opened an investigation into Mr Yves Jean-Bart, former President of the FHF, who was suspected of having coerced several female players from the National Technical Centre in Croix-des-Bouquets into having sexual relations with him. During the proceedings, the Investigatory Chamber identified Mr Rosnick Grant as one of the perpetrators of sexual abuse and opened an investigation against him in August 2020. On 22 July 2021, based on the final report of the FIFA Ethics Committee, the testimony of a victim, the statements of Mr Rosnick Grant, and the statements of the Chairman of the Investigation Chamber of the FIFA Ethics Committee, the Adjudicatory Chamber of the FIFA Ethics Committee issued the Challenged Decision.
On 6 October 2021, Mr Rosnick Grant filed an appeal at CAS requesting the annulment of the Challenged Decision, claiming that he was innocent of the charges against him. A CAS Panel of three arbitrators, composed of Mr Alexander McLin, President (Switzerland/USA), Prof. Gérald Simon (France) and Mr José J. Pintó (Spain), was constituted to decide the appeal. A hearing was held on 15 and 16 February 2023, during which numerous witnesses were heard, some of whom benefited from special protective measures.
As a basis for its decision, the Arbitral Panel considered the testimony of a victim, who had travelled to Switzerland for the hearing, to be accurate, coherent and credible. The Panel also noted the inconsistency and imprecision in the statements of the witnesses called by Mr Rosnick Grant, most of whom stated, in a contradictory and unconvincing manner, that the accusations against Mr Rosnick Grant were the result of a conspiracy against him. Finally, the Arbitral Panel found that the fine imposed on Mr Rosnick Grant was disproportionate to the salary conditions he was subject to in Haiti.
In conclusion, the Arbitral Panel found that the evidence against Mr Rosnick Grant regarding the sexual abuse charges was sufficiently convincing and that, as a result, the sanction imposed on Mr Rosnick Grant by the Court should be confirmed, with the exception of the fine, which was reduced to CHF 35'000. This decision comes a few weeks after another CAS decision concerning the former President of the FHF, Mr. Yves Jean-Bart, who was released from the sanctions imposed on him by FIFA due to insufficient evidence. That CAS decision is currently being appealed to the Swiss Federal Tribunal.
Sanctions: Nabiulin Artem (freestyle)
Why non-EU footballers may struggle to secure a UK visa for club trials
Published Wednesday, 29 March 2023.
Sanctions: Amriyev Alan (wrestling)
Can retired footballers appear in gambling ads?
Published Monday, 20 March 2023.
AAA Arbitrator Imposes Four-Year Sanction on Weightlifting Athlete Robert Scavilla for Anti-Doping Rule Violation
Swiss Federal Tribunal Rules That Sporting Succession Is Compatible With Public Policy
Published Wednesday, 15 March 2023.
Sports Disputes And Disciplinary Procedures - Annual Review 2022/23
Published Thursday, 02 March 2023.
Football Law Experts Discuss The Challenges And Opportunities Of Sporting Succession
Published Wednesday, 15 February 2023.
FIFA's Maternity Benefits For Female Players Enforced By Football Tribunal (Sara Björk Gunnarsdóttir v Lyon)
Published Friday, 03 February 2023.
ASA's First Ruling Under New Gambling Ad Rules: Analysis And Implications For Sports Organizations
Published Friday, 27 January 2023.
Horseracing Integrity & Safety Authority Ruled Unconstitutional - What Happened & Why (NHBPA V Black)
Published Thursday, 19 January 2023.
How BAT Ruled On A Player Contract Affected By Russia Ukraine War (Brantley v Basketball Club UNICS)
Published Friday, 13 January 2023.
Book Review: 4th Edition 2022 of Sports Law By David Thorpe, Antonio Buti, Paul Jonson, Jack Anderson
Protecting trademarks in keyword advertising in India - A guide for sports organisations
Published Friday, 16 December 2022.
How “Amicus Curiae” Works At The Court Of Arbitration For Sport
Published Friday, 09 December 2022.
Who is a ‘publisher’ in the context of defamatory material posted on a social media website? (Fairfax v Voller)
Published Friday, 02 December 2022.
The Standard of Proof and the Threshold for Appeal in Sports Disciplinary Cases (The FA v Imran Louza)
Published Wednesday, 30 November 2022.
Sports Lawyer In The Spotlight: Andrew Smith
Published Tuesday, 29 November 2022.
How Have The Pitch Invasions At Everton & Manchester City Been Dealt By The FA?
Published Friday, 11 November 2022.