Pdf Regulation of Sport

1,504 views

Published on

Presentation of Regulation of Sport

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,504
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Pdf Regulation of Sport

  1. 1. Regulation of Sport By Alfonso Valero Lawinsport.com
  2. 2. Introduction to sports law• Does Sport exist? – Very academic topic; but also professional publications • Sports and the Law or Sports Law – Sports Law covers all legal aspects related to sport • Not a sports person’s marriage, but yes the endorsement – How do the law firms deal with this area? • Sports Law Departments
  3. 3. Sources of sports law• Source of law = applicable law• Generally accepted: – Regulation of governing bodies: National / International • Self regulation • Based in agreement between parties – Law of national, European and international institutions • ‘Hard law’ (binding legal instruments) • Imposed law
  4. 4. Autonomy of Governing Bodies• Exponential growth in their relevance – More formalisation • Bound by natural justice (e.g. Elliot Saltman and European Tour) • Legal representation (e.g. Asif, Aamir and Butt and the ICC) • Panel members are judges (e.g. Delon Armitage and RFU – His Honour Judge Jeff Blackett –) • More complex rules (e.g. FA) • Decisions and punishment more elaborated (e.g. CAS awards) – More acceptance, thus less challenges
  5. 5. Autonomy of Governing Bodies (II)• Sports-sympathetic approach or ‘specificity of sport’ – No challenge to the governance of sport; e.g. Webster and art 17 Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players – BUT see El Hadary, Al-Ahly Sporting Club and FC Sion in Swiss Federal Court• Specialist sports knowledge• Less formal and restrictive• Cost efficient• Disadvantage: lack of jurisdictional input – e.g. Benfica, Atletico, CAS and Swiss Federal Court
  6. 6. Autonomy of Governing Bodies(III)• ADR mechanisms maintains disputes out of court – Art 64.2 FIFA Statutes: ‘Recourse to ordinary courts of law is prohibited unless specifically provided for in the FIFA regulations’• Courts don’t rule over non compliance with law (e.g. EU law) – See ‘Real Sociedad and Nihat Kahveci v. RFEF’ in contrast with ‘(CAS) FC Midtylland v FIFA’
  7. 7. Domestic Sports Law• Mark James (Sports Law): – Domestic Sports Law is the autonomous translational legal order through which the body of law and jurisprudence applied by international sports federations is created; in particular it includes the jurisprudence of the Court of Arbitration for Sport and its creation and harmonisation of sporting-legal norms• Autonomous legal order of NGB (e.g. BHA): – Constitution (e.g. BHA’s Memorandum and Articles of Association) – Board of managers (BHA’s Chairmans Committee) – Disciplinary committee (BHA’s Disciplinary Panel)• Case law of disciplinary committee very relevant – e.g. Sheffield United v FAPL and Sheffield United Football Club Ltd v West Ham United Football Club Plc
  8. 8. Domestic Sports Law (II)• Sports Resolutions UK – Interpretation and application of NGBs rules – e.g. World Professional Billiards and Snooker Association (WPBSA) v Higgins• National Anti Doping Panel – Steve Dooler (Rugby League)
  9. 9. Global Sports Law• Body of rules that governs sport at world level: – internal applicable law and procedure – developed by each ISF – and by the tribunals applying their rules• ISFs regulate conduct of its members, thus sport participants – e.g. Laws of the Game: IRB’s Board and IFAB
  10. 10. Global Sports Law (II)• CAS – appeal for majority Sport GBs – ambition of a lex sportiva – complex legal issues • Employment: FC Shaktar Donetsk v. Matuzalem Francelino da Silva, Real Zaragoza SAF and FIFA • Discrimination: Pistorious v. IAAF – albeit not all decisions published – Lex sportiva or application of norms?
  11. 11. National Sports Law• Acts of Parliaments and the decisions of the courts which rule on: – governance, administration, consumption and participation in sport• UK, contrary to France, Spain and others, has no ‘Sport Act’• UK courts do rule in questions of sport• Office of Fair Trading is another source
  12. 12. National Sports Law (II)• Decisions of the domestic courts – Kingaby v. Aston Villa Football Club [1912] • very first challenge to transfer rules • motivated by the increasing restriction of movement and professional alternatives • lost by footballer’s union due, probably, to counsel’s poor defence • rules remained unchallenged for fifty years (Eastham v Newcastle United [1964]) – Mark Jones v Welsh Rugby Football Union Jones (1998) (CA) • Natural justice in disciplinary hearings • WRFU changed regulations
  13. 13. National Sports Law (III)– Gasser v. Stinson, High Court (QBD, 15 June 1998 • 2 years doping ban on Gasser challenged in High Court • High Court contemplated restraint of trade, but refused • IAAF relocated to Monaco– Condon v. Basi [1985] CA • Compensation for personal injury– Stretch v. Romford Football Club • Romford Bombers Speedway Team banned from racing
  14. 14. National Sports Law (IV)• Legislation from the national Parliament – generally been poor, rushed and reactive: panic law – Public Health Act 1875: allowed urban authorities to purchase land to be able to provide places for public recreation – Football Spectators Act 1989: created Football Licensing Authority – London and Olympic and Paralympic Games Act 2006: protecting IOC’s IP
  15. 15. European Sports Law• Law generated by the institutions of the EU• Art. 6 Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU): – competence to act in support of, to coordinate and to supplement the actions of member states in the field of sport• Sport Unit: umbrella organisation for EU sports law and policy• Contrary to UK policy, more interventionist – Protecting application of EU law
  16. 16. European Sports Law• Some decisions: – Walrave and Koch v. Association Union Cycliste Internationale [1974] – Union Royal Belge des Societe de Football Association ASBL v. Jean-Marc Bosman [1995] – Meca-Medina and Majcen v. Commission of the European Communities [2006]
  17. 17. Conclusion• Concept of sports law is debatable• There are two main areas: – Internal development – Public framework• Internal development has different levels: pyramidal• Public framework can be parliamentary and judicial, within the different spheres Any Questions?

×