Editor's note: This report compiles all relevant news, events and
materials on International and European Sports Law based on the daily coverage
provided on our twitter feed @Sportslaw_asser. You
are invited to complete this survey via the comments section below, feel free
to add links to important cases, documents and articles we might have
overlooked.
The Headlines
Anti-doping whereabouts requirements declared
compatible with the athletes' right to privacy and family life
On 18 January 2018,
the European Court of Human Rights rendered a judgment with important consequences for the world of sport in
general and the anti-doping regime in particular. The Strasbourg-based court
was called upon to decide whether the anti-doping whereabouts system – which requires that a limited number of top elite
athletes provide their National Anti-Doping Organisation or International
Federation with regular information about their location, including identifying
for each day one specific 60-minute time slot where the athlete will be
available for testing at a pre-determined location – is compatible with the
athletes' right to private and family life under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and their freedom of movement pursuant to Article 2
Protocol No. 4 of the Convention. The case was brought by the French cyclist
Jeannie Longo and five French athlete unions that had filed their application
on behalf of 99 professional handball, football, rugby, and basketball players.
While acknowledging
that the whereabouts requirements clash with the athletes' right to private and
family life, the judges took the view that such a restriction is necessary in
order to protect the health of athletes and ensure a level playing field in
sports competitions. They held that ''the
reduction or removal of the relevant obligations would lead to an increase in
the dangers of doping for the health of sports professionals and of all those
who practise sports, and would be at odds with the European and international
consensus on the need for unannounced testing as part of doping control''. Accordingly,
the judges found no violation of Article 8 of the Convention and, in a similar
vein, ruled that Article 2 Protocol No. 4 of the Convention was not applicable
to the case.
Football stakeholders preparing to crack down on
agents' excessive fees
It has been a
record-breaking January transfer window with Premier League clubs having spent
an eye-watering £430 million on signing new acquisitions. These spiralling
transfer fees enable football agents, nowadays also called intermediaries, to
charge impressive sums for their services.
Asser International Sports Law Blog | International Sports Law Publications
-cas" class="postTitle">Doyen vs. Sporting I: Doyen’s Pyrrhic Victory at the CAS (3)
Elsa wrote: Merci pour le commentaire de la sentence. Mais cel... [More]The Impact of the new FIFA Regulations for Intermediaries: A comparative analysis of Brazil, Spain and England. By Luis Torres (2)
Gerald Ibeh. wrote: please how much is required to register a company ... [More]The EU State aid and sport saga: The Real Madrid Decision (part 1) (5)
Oskar van Maren wrote: In any case, I would be happy to continue this dis... [More]The EU State aid and sport saga: The Real Madrid Decision (part 1) (5)
Oskar van Maren wrote: You are right, it is a bit strange that the Commis... [More]UEFA’s Financial Fair Play Regulations and the Rise of Football’s 1% (2)
Stephan wrote: Also, in conclusion prize money is the easiest way... [More]UEFA’s Financial Fair Play Regulations and the Rise of Football’s 1% (2)
Stephan wrote: Interesting article.
I've one remark on your... [More]The EU State aid and sport saga: The Real Madrid Decision (part 1) (5)
Florentino Perez wrote: But the requirement to be an interested party in o... [More]Comment RSS 