The ECHR Grand Chamber judgment in Semenya v Switzerland and its wider impact on international sport

The European Court of Human Rights Grand Chamber's judgment in Semenya v Switzerland.^[1] represents a watershed moment in the intersection of sports regulation and human rights law. After years of litigation across multiple jurisdictions – from the Court of Arbitration for Sport to the Swiss Federal Supreme Court and finally to Strasbourg – the case has crystallised fundamental questions about how international sports bodies regulate athlete eligibility, how national courts review sports arbitration awards, and where the boundaries of human rights protection lie in the global sporting arena.

In the second part of this two-part article, (see the first part here on the history of the case), the authors consider the basis for the Grand Chamber judgment, outlining its repercussions for the assessment of human rights and discrimination law claims in sport, at the international level and in the domestic (UK) context. The Grand Chamber’s judgment was structured in two parts: first it considered the Articles conferring substantive rights under the Convention; and second it addressed the right to a fair hearing under Article 6(1). We structure our analysis in the same way.

• Analysis of the Convention substantive rights (no jurisdiction)
• Analysis of the Article 6 rights
• Observations for CAS practitioners
• Observations for UK sports lawyers
• Developments since the CAS Award

Please note that Chris Lavey acted for World Athletics throughout the legal proceedings in Semenya (up to and including the Grand Chamber’s judgment) and Ruth Kennedy acted for World Athletics in related proceedings.