Questions

Sports Law

Diferencias en Torno al «Pase» Futbolístico
Si existe un factor de movilidad en el desempeño de una actividad laboral es en el caso de los futbolistas profesionales. Son muy pocos los jugadores que permanecen un tiempo prolongado prestando servicio en un mismo club. Habitualmente son transferidos a otros elencos, tanto nacionales como extranjeros.
Sports Marketing in China : an IP perspective
Given the increasing popularity of sports among Chinese consumers and China’s hosting of a number of international sporting events and with the Beijing Olympics just around the corner now giving China centre stage on the sports front, it is no wonder that brand owners are seeking out sports marketing opportunities there. But brand owners must take note of the risks, particularly concerning intellectual property (IP) and brand management. Indeed, China’s sports marketing environment is relatively new, and many players are inexperienced in the complexities of sponsorship arrangements. Moreover, the PRC regulatory environment is still developing, and IP rights remain difficult to enforce. Only companies that manage risks carefully will protect their brands and get the most from their sponsorship marketing dollars.
The CAS An Arbitral Institution with its Seat in Switzerland
The Court of Arbitration for Sport (the CAS) has become a very successful international arbitral body. The CAS has its seat in Switzerland – arbitration before the CAS is based on Swiss law. In this article, Meinrad Vetter presents an overview of Swiss law governing CAS cases, including the rules of procedure on appeals from the CAS to the Swiss Supreme Court.
The use of criminal justice mechanisms to combat doping in sport
Drugs cheats in professional cycling, as well as in other sports, may be liable to criminal justice sanction under current law. Adopting criminal justice mechanisms and being firm in denunciation of dishonest conduct in sport through the use of criminal charges against athletes and sports managers may challenge doping more effectively than is achievable through administrative sanction and education.
When, where and why does the State intervene in Sport : a contemporary perspective
On Friday 19 November 2004, a violent brawl broke out on the basketball courts of Auburn Hills, Michigan, USA.1 It occurred in the final minute of a game between the Detroit Pistons and the Indiana Pacers at national level. The fight between the players was taken into the stands after one spectator threw water over a player. Bottles, chairs and other debris were thrown onto the courts. The offending players were suspended indefinitely. Furthermore, the police considered pressing criminal charges, primarily because the fight involved spectators. On the playing field this sort of behaviour is of regular occurrence and is usually accepted. A government rarely steps in to charge a player with assault or battery following a violent brawl during a game. Hence, it has been said that this event could be a watershed in American sport; one which could change the way players interact in the future. However, sport is afforded special treatment by both society and the State. One wonders how an isolated event such as this could affect a well established lenient approach designed to accommodate sporting pastimes.
Irregularity of Solidarity or Solidarity in the Irregularity
This joint article is the result of the joint work of the authors as lawyers in a case aiming to prove a claim based on the FIFA solidarity mechanism in respect of a domestic transfer. They were engaged by the Bulgarian football club CSKA Sofia to investigate the possibilities for sustaining a claim for solidarity against Manchester United FC in connection with the transfer of the federative rights of the CSKA former player Dimitar Berbatov from Tottenham Hotspur FC to Manchester United FC in the fall of 2008. The amount of the transfer fee due to Tottenham Hotspur according to the information reported by the media was 30.75 million pounds. Despite the presence of a case law to the contrary, the authors consider that the non-applicability of the FIFA solidarity system to domestic transfers leads to quite unfair results. Namely, that the club who invested and trained a player capable of moving from one club to another for such significant amounts is deprived from receiving anything, simply because the English Football Association has not complied with the provisions of article 1.2. of the FIFA Regulations, even though the concrete provisions on solidarity in the Regulations do not make any distinction between international and domestic transfers. The club CSKA Sofia was ready to lead the battle aiming to overrule the current practice so the claim was lodged with the FIFA DRC. However, due to recent changes in the ownership and management of the club and also financial difficulties, CSKA Sofia was forced to withdraw its claim, thus missing the opportunity of becoming a flagman of the battle of the small clubs for real solidarity.