The role of the Court of Arbitration for Sport in sports governance: legal trends and future challenges
Abstract
The aim of this study was to examine the role of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) in sports governance, focusing on legal trends and future challenges. The study adopted a qualitative doctrinal and descriptive research design to examine the role of CAS in contemporary sports governance. The research focused on analysing the evolution, legal framework, jurisdiction, and emerging challenges of CAS as the leading institution for the resolution of international sports disputes. CAS has played a significant role in resolving international sports disputes by providing a specialised arbitration mechanism that ensures efficiency, neutrality, and legal certainty. It has evolved into a forum for the adjudication of sports-related disputes, ranging from doping violations and contractual disagreements to governance and disciplinary issues. Nowadays, sports-related disputes have increased considerably due to the commercialisation of sport, and CAS faces increasingly complex legal challenges in resolving such disputes. However, CAS also faces important concerns regarding the independence and impartiality of its arbitrators, as these aspects have been questioned by claims that CAS tends to favour governing bodies over individual athletes. The future effectiveness of CAS will depend on its ability to strengthen stakeholder confidence through greater transparency, enhanced procedural safeguards, broader accessibility, and continued efforts to preserve institutional independence.
Downloads
-
Abstract16
-
PDF27
References
1. Acries. (2021, March 21). Sports Arbitration: Certain Unique Features and the Court of Arbitration for Sport. Retrieved from https://www.acerislaw.com/sports-arbitration-certain-unique-features-and-the-court-of-arbitration-for-sport-the-cas/
2. Blackshaw, R. C. (2006). The Court Of Arbitration for Sport 1984–2004. TMC Asser Press.
3. CAS. (2013). History of CAS. Retrieved from https://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/templates/inside_1_col.html
4. CAS. (2023). Code of Sports-related Arbitration. Retrieved from R-28: https://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/CAS_Code_2023__EN_.pdf
5. CAS. (n.d.). What is the Court of Arbitration for Sport? Retrieved from https://www.tas-cas.org/en/general-information/frequently-%20asked-questions.html
6. Claudia Pechstein v. Court of Arbitration for Sport, 40575/10 and 67474/10) (European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). (2018).
7. Code of Sports-related Arbitration. (2023). Retrieved from https://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/CAS_Code_2023__EN_.pdf
8. Code: ICAS Statutes. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.tas-cas.org/en/icas/code-icas-statutes.html
9. Court of Arbitration for Sport. (2013). Fenerbahçe Spor Kulübü v. UEFA, CAS 2013/A/3256, arbitral award of 28 August 2013.
10. Court of Arbitration for Sport. (2016). Maria Sharapova v. International Tennis Federation, CAS 2016/A/4643 (Award of 30 September 2016). https://jurisprudence.tas-cas.org/
11. Forster, J. (2006). Global Sports Organizations and Their Governance. Corporate Governance, 6(1), 72-83.
12. Foster, K. (2016). Lex Sportiva and Lex Ludica: the Court of Arbitration for Sport’s Jurisprudence. Entertainment and Sports Law Journal, 3(2), 1-14.
13. Georgi Gradev, M. K. (2025, Feburary 10). Jurisdiction in CAS appeals: Why procedural compliance and naming the right party matters? Retrieved from https://www.lawinsport.com/topics/item/jurisdiction-in-cas-appeals-why-procedural-compliance-and-naming-the-right-party-matters
14. Goh, C. L., & Anderson, J. (2022). The credibility of the Court of Arbitration for Sport. Harvard Journal of Sports & Entertainment Law, 13(2), 233–264.
15. IOC. (n.d.). Court of Arbitration for Sports. Retrieved from https://www.olympics.com/ioc/cas
16. Kane, D. (2003). Twenty years on: An evaluation of the Court of Arbitration for Sport. In The Court of Arbitration for Sport 1984–2004 (pp. 611–634). Melbourne Journal of International Law.
17. Kane, D. (2003). Twenty years on: An evaluation of the Court of Arbitration for Sport. In The Court of Arbitration for Sport 1984–2004. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-6704-591-9_33
18. Kavanagh, T. (1999). The doping cases and the need for the International Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). University of New South Wales Law Journal, 22(3), 721–723. https://www.unswlawjournal.unsw.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/22-3-14.pdf
19. Kocasakal, H. Ö. (2020). The Impartiality and Independency of the Court of Arbitration for Sport within the Framework of ECRH Pechtein Ruling. Retrieved from https://iupress.istanbul.edu.tr/en/journal/ppil/article/avrupa-insan-haklari-mahkemesinin-pecshtein-karari-cercevesinde-casin-tarafsizligi-ve-bagimsizligi
20. LLC, A. L. (2021). Sports Arbitration: Certain Unique Features and the Court of Arbitration for Sport (the “CAS”). Retrieved from https://www.acerislaw.com/sports-arbitration-certain-unique-features-and-the-court-of-arbitration-for-sport-the-cas/
21. LOSC Lille v. Sporting Clube de Portugal & Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA); Sporting Clube de Portugal v. LOSC Lille, CAS 2023/A/9670 & CAS 2023/A/9671 (Court of Arbitration for Sport, 2023).
22. Matthieu Reeb. (2002). The Court of Arbitration for Sport: History and Operation . Retrieved from http://www.skilex.at/Obergurgl_Vortrag_Reeb_E.pdf
23. Mavromati, D., & Reeb, M. (2015). Introduction: The International Council of Arbitration for Sport (ICAS) and the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS): 30 years of history. In The code of the Court of Arbitration for Sport: Commentary, cases and materials (pp. 1–8). Kluwer Law International.
24. McLaren, R. H. (2001). Introducing the Court of Arbitration for Sport: The Ad Hoc Division at the Olympic Games. Marquette Sports Law Review, 12(1), 517-542.
25. McLaren, R. H. (2001). The Court of Arbitration for Sport: An independent arena for the world's sports disputes. Valparaiso University Law Review, 35(2), 379–398. https://scholar.valpo.edu/vulr/vol35/iss2/3
26. Mitten, M. J. (2014). The Court Of Arbitration for Sport and its Global Jurisprudence: International Legal Pluralism in a World without National Boundaries. Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution, 30(1), 1-12.
27. MS, A. (2012). The Evolution of Arbitration and its Consensual Nature in Consent in International Arbitration. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
28. Palermo, G. (2018). Independence of CAS vis-à-vis its Funders and Repeat Users of its Services. Retrieved from https://arbitrationblog.kluwerarbitration.com/2018/05/25/independence-cas-vis-vis-funders-repeat-users-services/
29. Perruchoud, M. (2023). Application of Swiss law and infuence of Swiss protection of legal personality in international sport: a necessity to ensure equality of treatment among competitors? The International Sports Law Journal, 23(2), 340–356.
30. Rigozzi, A. (2010). Challenging Awards of the Court of Arbitration for Sport. Journal of International Dispute Settlement, 1(1), 217-265.
31. Rigozzi, A., & Robert-Tissot, F. (2015). “Consent” in sports arbitration: Its multiple aspects. In E. Geisinger & E. Trabaldo de Mestral (Eds.), Sports arbitration as a coach for other players? (ASA Special Series No. 41, pp. 59–94). JurisNet LLC.
32. S29. (2023). Code of Sports-related Arbitration. Retrieved from https://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/CAS_Code_2023__EN_.pdf
33. Segesser, G. V. (2011). Swiss Federal Tribunal rejects multiple standards of independence and impartiality among arbitrators. Retrieved from https://arbitrationblog.kluwerarbitration.com/2011/01/25/swiss-federal-tribunal-rejects-multiple-standards-of-independence-and-impartiality-among-arbitrators/
34. SFT -Valverde v. Coni (WADA & UCI (4A_234 2010).
35. Steingruber, A. M. (2012). Consent in International Arbitration. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
36. Steingruber, A. M. (2012). The Evolution of Arbitration and Its Consensual Nature in Consent in International Arbitration. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
37. Swiss Federal Tribunal. (2012). Francelino da Silva Matuzalem v. Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA), 4A_558/2011 (Judgment of 27 March 2012). https://www.bger.ch
38. Trakman, L. (2007). The Impartiality and Independence of Arbitrators Reconsidered, International Arbitration Law Review, 10(4), 124, 127–128.
39. UNFA. (1958). United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (New York, 10 June 1958). Retrieved from Article 3: https://www.newyorkconvention.org/english
40. Williams, D. A. R., & Kawharu, A. (2011). Nature and sources of arbitration law. In Williams & Kawharu on arbitration (3rd ed., chap. 1). LexisNexis.
41. Willick, S. E., Miller, G. D., & Eichner, D. (2016). The Anti-Doping Movement. PM & R, 8, 125–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmrj.2015.12.001
42. World Anti-Doping Agency v. Sun Yang & Fédération Internationale de Natation. (2020). CAS 2019/A/6148 (Court of Arbitration for Sport, Award of 28 February 2020). https://jusmundi.com/en/document/decision/en-world-anti-doping-agency-wada-v-sun-yang-and-federation-internationale-de-natation-fina-arbitral-award-tuesday-22nd-june-2021-1
The works and papers that are published in this Journal are subject to the following terms:
1. The Publication Service of the University of Murcia (the publisher) has the Publication Rights (Copyright) to the published papers and works, and favors and permits the reusing of the same under the license indicated in point 2.
© Servicio de Publicaciones, Universidad de Murcia, 2013
2. The papers and works are to be published in the digital edition of the Journal under the license Creative Commons Reconocimiento-No Comercial-Sin Obra Derivada 3.0 España (legal text). The copying, using, spreading, transmitting and publicly displaying of the papers, works or publication are permitted as long as: i) the authors and original sources (Journal, publisher and URL of the publication) are quoted; ii) it is not used for commercial benefit; iii) the existence and specifications of this users license are mentioned.
3. Conditions of Self-Archiving. It is permitted and encouraged that the authors spread electronically the pre-print (before printing) and/or post-print (the revised, evaluated and accepted) versions of their papers or works before their publication since this favors their circulation and early diffusion and therefore can help increase their citation and quotation, and also there reach through the academic community.
The works and papers that are published in this Journal are subject to the following terms:
1. The Publication Service of the University of Murcia (the publisher) has the Publication Rights (Copyright) to the published papers and works, and favors and permits the reusing of the same under the license indicated in point 2.
© Servicio de Publicaciones, Universidad de Murcia, 2013
2. The papers and works are to be published in the digital edition of the Journal under the license Creative Commons Reconocimiento-No Comercial-Sin Obra Derivada 3.0 España (legal text). The copying, using, spreading, transmitting and publicly displaying of the papers, works or publication are permitted as long as: i) the authors and original sources (Journal, publisher and URL of the publication) are quoted; ii) it is not used for commercial benefit; iii) the existence and specifications of this users license are mentioned.
3. Conditions of Self-Archiving. It is permitted and encouraged that the authors spread electronically the pre-print (before printing) and/or post-print (the revised, evaluated and accepted) versions of their papers or works before their publication since this favors their circulation and early diffusion and therefore can help increase their citation and quotation, and also there reach through the academic community.
