The recent decision to allow the Olympic Flame to travel through Albert Square, the setting for the BBC's fictional soap opera EastEnders, is a perfect representation of the London 2012 Olympic ethos. EastEnders and Albert Square are a fictional creation based in Borehamwood, a posh area in Hertfordshire that has no connection to the East End of London, where the drama is set. The London 2012 Olympics is increasingly becoming a drama created by executives located elsewhere (Canary Wharf) that has no connection to the area in which it is set.

The Olympic Flame that passes through the fictional East End borough of Walford will not even be the true Olympic Flame, at least as far as tradition dictates. London 2012 will represent the first time that the Olympic Torch Relay does not pass from the previous host city to the new host city on foot, the idea being to pass the symbolic 'Olympic Spirit' from city to city in the form of fire. The International Olympic Committee banned Olympic Torch relays following hijacking of the Torch before the Beijing 2008 Olympics.

Now I know all of this is supposed to be a bit of fun, but London 2012 organisers seem blind to the fact that forging links between a fictional soap opera and an Olympic Games that was originally billed as being for the East End of London could appear patronising. Firstly, London Olympic organisers announced that London's Olympic Park would share the E20 postcode of fictional Albert Square (why not E2012?). Now they are granting the privilege of featuring the flame to a soap opera that turned down the chance to relocate to the Olympic Park, slap bang in the middle of the area the soap is supposed to represent.

"There was the chance for the BBC to show genuine commitment to the East End - an area it has harvested for audiences for decades", said London Mayor Boris Johnson. "I'm astonished that the boss class don't see the obvious advantages of rooting a popular drama in an area it claims to portray". Johnson's sentiment is correct, yet his comments are almost comically ironic when you consider that London 2012 organisers have done much the same thing by taking many key Olympic events away from East London. After Badminton and Rhythmic Gymnastics were taken away from the East End, the final straw came last year, when London Boroughs sought to take legal action against the organisers of London 2012 for moving the marathon route from East London to finish on The Mall in central London, making the 2012 marathon the first in Olympic history not to finish in the Olympic stadium. London 2012 had just appointed the organisers of the London Marathon to plan the route. Guess where the London Marathon finishes? Road cycling will also not come anywhere near East London…I could go on, but I don't want you to get too bored…

London 2012 Chair Seb Coe welcomed the move. "Today's announcement is a great addition to the Olympic Torch Relay Route", he said. "I'm sure the people of Walford will now start planning their celebrations to welcome the Flame to Albert Square". They won't, because they don't exist, and neither does the connection between the London 2012 Olympics and improving the lives of people in the East End. If you search on the internet for 'London 2012 Games making a difference in East London', the top link is a story about how volunteers from East London helped clean up rivers within the Olympic Park for free. They will continue to help by spending money they don't have in the vast Westfield shopping complex in Stratford (the company could not even bring itself to change its name to Eastfield…) and are supposed not to notice that few people from the Olympic Boroughs have actually been given jobs on the site.

I have nothing against London hosting the Olympics, but it's time to drop the pretence that this is about improving the lives of people in London and admit that it's an exercise in making money. However, I expect that the fiction will continue long after the Games are over.

Andy Brown

Say what you like about Ken Bates, but the former Chelsea Chairman is an astute businessman and knows how to protect assets. Bates famously bought Chelsea for £1 in 1982 after previous owners had sold Stamford Bridge to property developers Marler Estates, who subsequently went bankrupt. Chelsea Pitch Owners was created in 1992 and sold shares for £100 each, limited to 100 shares per person to prevent one person from ever gaining control of the company. In 1997, CPO bought the Stamford Bridge freehold and pitch for approximately £10 million, the idea being if supporters owned Stamford Bridge, it could never again be sold to property developers, thereby securing the future of the club.

In doing this, Bates created - perhaps unintentionally - the most effective and sustainable method of protecting a club against being asset stripped. The Football League and Premier League use the FA’s Fit and Proper Persons test to prevent unscrupulous owners taking money out of the game. However, as has been proved this week, granting supporters ownership of their club's pitch is more effective in protecting a club's heritage than any other method that has been devised recently. Chelsea, which has called Stamford Bridge home since the club's foundation in 1905, had planned to move as capacity is constrained by property and railway lines which encircle the ground, preventing it from a large expansion beyond its capacity of 41,841, which the club argues hinders its development by forcing it to rely on cash investment by owner, Roman Abramovic. However, the club failed to secure the 75% approval required from Chelsea Pitch Owners and so will be forced to remain at its home.

The Premier League, Football League, club owners and supporters groups should take note of developments at Stamford Bridge. Recent events involving Plymouth Argyle and Rangers - and a survey suggesting that fraud is still widespread at football clubs - suggest that controls designed to protect clubs might not be working as they should. A better way to safeguard the future of clubs could be an entry condition requiring clubs to offer supporters the chance to purchase their club's pitch – and there is no harm in doing this, since supporters will almost always vote in favour of proposals that are in the best interests of their club. Such a requirement would prevent clubs from moving out of their historic homes when fans are against it and - more importantly - would prevent unscrupulous owners from asset-stripping a club by selling a club's home for profit, a situation that Brighton & Hove Albion supporters will be able to tell you all about. Supporters groups should pressure new owners to implement such schemes, as failure to do so on the part of a new owner would say a great deal about their future intentions for the club. 

Events since then have also been interesting. Chelsea's local council, Hammersmith & Fulham, has issued a statement pledging to work with the club to increase the capacity of the ground. The statement mentioned how proud the borough was to host three Premier League football clubs, indicating that they are willing to be lenient with planning requests in order to ensure that Chelsea can increase its capacity whilst remaining at Stamford Bridge. This suggests that when there is no other option other than to redevelop - as in Chelsea's case - clubs and local councils are forced to cooperate and find a solution that will enable their local club to continue to be successful - which is what all parties involved in such discussions want anyway.

Finally, those readers who have continued to the end of this article will be rewarded with advice to ignore my opening statement. Don't say exactly what you like about Ken Bates. He is aware that there is a law called libel, and he is not afraid to use it!

Andy Brown

Should Dwain Chambers - and other British athletes facing lifetime bans from the Olympics -compete in the London Olympics next year? Opinion is divided in sporting circles. Some fellow athletes say he should not; whilst others say that he should be allowed to do so. Maurice Greene, a fellow sprinter, is in the ‘no’ camp; whereas Paula Radcliffe, the marathon world record holder, is firmly in the ‘yes’ camp, characterising the ban as being unfair, particularly as he owned up to the doping offence!

This debate regarding the British Olympic Association (BOA) bye-law 25, which imposes an automatic ban for life from the Olympics on any British Athlete who has been suspended from competition as a result of being ‘convicted’ of a doping offence has been sparked off again, this time by a landmark ruling of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), handed down on 6 October 2011, in the case of the American 400m Olympic champion LaShawn Merritt. So, what was this case and what did the CAS decide?

Following a joint request for arbitration filed by the United States Olympic Committee (USOC) and the International Olympic Committee (IOC) regarding the validity of the ‘Regulations Regarding Participation in the Olympic Games - Rule 45 of the Olympic Charter’ (also known as the ‘Osaka Rule’), the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) issued the following decision:

‘The IOC Executive Board’s June 27, 2008 decision prohibiting athletes who have been suspended for more than six months for an anti-doping rule violation from participating in the next Olympic Games following the expiration of their suspension is invalid and unenforceable’.

The CAS Arbitral Panel, composed of Prof. Richard H. McLaren (Canada), President, Mr David W. Rivkin (USA) and Mr Michele Bernasconi (Switzerland), came to the conclusion that the ‘Osaka Rule’ was more properly characterised as a disciplinary sanction, rather than a pure condition of eligibility to compete in the Olympic Games.

Such a disciplinary sanction is not in compliance with Article 23.2.2 of the World Anti-Doping Code (WADA Code), which provides that the Signatories of the Code may not introduce provisions that change the effect of periods of ineligibility provisions of the WADA Code, because it adds further ineligibility to the WADA Code anti-doping sanction after that sanction has been served.

The Panel further held that, because the IOC made the WADA Code a part of its own governing statute (the Olympic Charter, under Rule 44), the ‘Osaka Rule’ is in fact a violation of the IOC’s own Statute and is therefore invalid and unenforceable.

The CAS Panel also emphasised that if the IOC wanted to exclude athletes who have been sanctioned for doping from the Olympic Games, it could propose an amendment to the World Anti-Doping Code, which would allow other Signatories to consider such an amendment and possibly to adopt it. If so, no ne bis in idem issue (prohibition against double jeopardy) would be raised, as the ineligibility would be part of a single sanction. Moreover, the principle of proportionality could be met because only one adjudicatory body would be in position to assess the proper sanction for certain behaviour, taking into consideration the overall effect of the sanction to be imposed.

It has been reported that David Howman, the Director General of WADA, has written to the BOA asking them to review and reconsider their rule. However Lord Moynihan, the President of the BOA and a former UK Sports Minister, maintains that it perfectly valid and enforceable, claiming that it is an eligibility matter. How can this position can be maintained in the light of the CAS decision in the LaShawn Merritt case, where the IOC argued that the so-called ‘Osaka’ rule was an eligibility one and the CAS held that it was a disciplinary sanction? I would argue that the BOA rule imposes an additional sanction on British athletes that have fallen foul of the doping rules, been suspended and have served their time only to find that they face an additional sanction neither foreseen nor approved by the WADA Code, which after all is – or at least should be – the sole body dealing with all aspects of doping in sport. This additional sanction is clearly the effect of the BOA rule, and this effect is not affected by the fact that it is possible to appeal to the BOA for the rule to be lifted in certain cases, according to their particular circumstances. Equally, the fact that the BOA claims that 39 out of 42 such appeals have been successful is irrelevant, if not only for the fact that in three of those cases, the athletes concerned have suffered a double penalty, that is, double jeopardy, which is illegal because no one can be punished twice for the same offence.

Apart from the above legal arguments, not to mention the clear possibility - in my opinion - of the BOA rule being held by a Court to be an unreasonable ‘restraint of trade’ for ‘elite’ athletes (those who earn their livelihoods through the practice of their sports) and, therefore, void and unenforceable, there also are some sporting considerations that should be taken into account. David Millar, the former cycling world champion who is also affected by the BOA rule, argues that it does not encourage the rehabilitation of offenders who have served their time, or allow for any kind of education of athletes concerning the taking of performance-enhancing drugs. There is also another sporting consideration, and that is discrimination. Apparently, according to the International Association of Athletics Federations, there are at least 83 non-British athletes not affected by the BOA rule who will now be able to compete in the 2012 London Olympics as a result of the CAS ruling. Under the IOC Charter, discrimination of any kind is unlawful! After all, sport is – or, at least, should be – a matter of fairness and athletes competing on a so-called ‘level playing field’.

In my view, the BOA has an overwhelming case to answer and should scrap their rule, particularly in the light of the clear decision from the CAS in the LaShawn Merritt doping case.

Professor Ian Blackshaw

TMC Asser International Sports Law Centre, The Hague

ian.blackshaw@orange.fr

Sport can protect the value of its broadcasting rights following the Karen Murphy ruling by using new licensing methods, concluded a Briefing organised on 20 October by World Sports Law Report and Field Fisher Waterhouse LLP.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

British athletes could face exclusion from the London 2012 Olympics if the British Olympic Association (BOA) doesn't either drop or place under review its ban on convicted dopers from competing in the Olympics.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

Great Britain's Gambling Commission launched a consultation on 7 October investigating whether using inside information for betting constitutes misuse of that information, and whether further safeguards are needed to protect sport's integrity.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

The Deutsche Fußball Liga (DFL - German football league) has recently announced that it intends to set up a licensing regime for the commercial use of its fixture lists, allowing it to recoup money from unauthorised users, such as gambling operators. This decision must be seen in light of the fact that the regulation of gambling in Germany remains uncertain and confused. Gregor Lentze, Founding Partner of Lentze Stopper Rechtsanwälte, examines whether the protection of such fixture lists from commercial use can be justified under German law and outlines the current status of German sports betting laws.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

The Professional Football Compensation Committee is used by the Football Association Premier League and the Football League to determine compensation for training young players*. Tim Copplestone, a Solicitor with Clarke Willmott LLP, explains how it works.

Italy became one of the first countries to pass legislation making doping a criminal offence. Lucio Colantuoni and Elisa Brigandì of the Sports Law Research Center in Milan examine what constitutes a criminal offence of doping under Italian law and how this contrasts with what sporting regulations consider to be a doping offence. They examine previous attempts to legislate in doping and explore inconsistencies between the criminal offence of doping and sporting regulations on doping.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

Whilst some anti-doping organisations are now working closely with law enforcement organisations, many have yet to take this step. Catherine Ordway, a Sport & Anti-Doping Consultant who has worked on collaboration with law enforcement with ASADA, UKAD and CCES, examines how anti-doping authorities can engage with law enforcement through the use of information sharing, memorandums of understanding, outsourcing and - crucially - engage with authorities that may have priorities other than doping in sport.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

Padel recently came to the attention of the international sports law community when a new professional tournament, the Padel Pro Tour, came into conflict with the Spanish Padel federation. Ricardo Gentzsch, an Abogado with Schiller Abogados, explains the dispute, the origins of the game and its quest for Olympic status.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

Sport can still protect the value of its broadcasting rights following the Karen Murphy ruling by carefully defining its public, concluded an Emergency Briefing organised in London yesterday. Whilst rights holders will no longer be able to partition the single market into Member States in order to sell those rights, this will not result in a huge drop in value as rights holders will be able to use other methods to partition their markets.

Licensing different language broadcasts of sport could offer one method of partitioning rights into different markets, explained Tom Moody-Stuart, a Barrister with 8 New Square Chambers. “Leaving to one side Sky and football for a minute, you are licensing a particular language version of a particular programme or film and you can license that within a particular territory – you have no control over where it goes afterwards”, he said. “That is something that you can evaluate, the size of the market and take fair remuneration for. It doesn’t matter where they are, you are defining your public, and that’s the answer to all of this.”

Barrister Marie Demetriou of Brick Court Chambers, who represented Southsea pub landlady Karen Murphy in her case at the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), agreed. “You can’t partition the market, but I don’t think there would be much objection to licensing on the basis of language”, she said. “What happens at the moment is that Nova provides commentary in both English and Greek. That’s why it’s so attractive to people like Karen Murphy. I don’t think there would be a competition objection to removing that service.” It was explained that Murphy held a domestic licence with Greek broadcaster Nova as opposed to a commercial one, as commercial licences in the Greek market required an assessment of the premises in which the licence was to be used. This could not be carried out in Murphy’s case since her pub was in Southsea.

In its 4 October ruling, the CJEU ruled that a system of licensing which grants broadcasters territorial exclusivity on a Member State basis and which prohibits TV viewers from watching the broadcasts with a decoder card in other EU Member States is contrary to the EU principle of freedom to provide services. However, it also ruled that the screening of matches containing copyrighted works (such as the Premier League logo) in a pub requires the authorisation of the author of those works, as it constitutes a new ‘communication to the public’ as specified in Article 3 of the Copyright Directive.

“The pub subscription model is not really replicated across Europe”, said Raj Koria of sports rights and marketing agency Sportfive. “There is a view that this is an English problem”. Following the reasoning of the judgment, it was suggested that it might be acceptable for UK pubs to screen Premier League games using a commercial licence from another country, however the judgment provided no guidance as to whether this reasoning is correct. One solution suggested to this issue was for the Premier League to only sell one commercial licence, which all European commercial premises would have to purchase.

“It seems that the consensus amongst most commentators is that the Premier League is going to think about how it can lawfully re-tender its rights”, said Daniel Geey, an Associate with Field Fisher Waterhouse. “There may be some type of selling of live Premier League rights on a pan-European basis. Another solution may be for the Premier League to launch its own TV channel which it could license to other broadcasters and its own subscription internet channel.” It was suggested that this might be a wise move in the long term, as sport may currently be going through the process of widespread piracy that music went through before the launch of iTunes gave people a central shop from which to purchase content at a reasonable rate.

As the judgment suggested that rights holders cannot partition markets on a Member State basis, a potential issue raised was whether geo-blocking is now illegal, as it uses technology to prevent users from certain countries accessing internet content. Further clarity on this, on whether commercial licenses from other countries are acceptable and other questions is expected when the case returns to the High Court for a final judgement.

EDITORS NOTES

1. The ‘Emergency Briefing: CJEU Ruling on Sport, IP & Broadcasting Rights’ was organised by World Sports Law Report, World Online Gambling Law Report, E-Commerce Law & Policy and Field Fisher Waterhouse LLP. It took place at the London offices of Field Fisher Waterhouse LLP on 20 October.

2. For more information on future Cecile Park Conferences events, click here or contact David Longford on +44 (0) 20 7012 1384.

3. The two Karen Murphy judgments, cases C-403/08 and C-429/08 are available from the Court of Justice of the European Union internet site.

Sporting Organisations are cooperating closer than ever before in efforts to tackle corruption caused by illegal betting, it emerged at Sport & Gambling 2011, an annual conference organised by World Sports Law Report and World Online Gambling Law Report on 29 September. However, opinion was divided on whether an international body similar to the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) is needed to oversee integrity issues; whether minimum guidelines for sport and gambling operators are needed; or whether closer cooperation between all concerned parties is sufficient.

Huw Roberts, Legal Counsel for the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF), revealed that the IAAF and the International Olympic Committee (IOC) are to develop an integrity enforcement programme within the next 12 months, ahead of the London 2012 Olympics. An IOC cross-sector international review group is also examining current international efforts to protect the integrity of sport, and will report its findings before the end of the year. The British Horseracing Authority (BHA) and the International Cricket Council (ICC) also agreed to share expertise in tackling corruption at Sport & Gambling 2011.

It was also revealed that international police organisation Interpol has been working with the International Cricket Council (ICC) and Great Britain’s Gambling Commission. “We have engaged with Interpol”, said Sir Ronnie Flanagan, Chairman of the ICC’s Anti-Corruption and Security Unit. “There is a possibility for a memorandum of understanding and other relationships”. Nick Tofiluk, Director of Regulation at Great Britain’s Gambling Commission, said it had been working with Interpol and European police organisations in an effort to take a more international approach to tackling corruption. “There is little to be gained by each national taking its own regulatory path”, he said. Interpol has recently been working with the IOC, FIFA and UEFA to investigate integrity issues. Rick Parry, former Head of the Sports Betting Integrity Unit, backed the idea of pan-sport integrity units, pointing out that smaller sports do not have the finances to police integrity effectively.

Stephen Ketteley, a Partner at DLA Piper – the conference’s Gold Sponsor – pointed out that these issues are likely to get more complex due to a new approach to licensing gambling operators in Europe. He pointed out that operators will now need a licence for every country they wish to operate in, now that Great Britain and Europe have rejected the previous approach which only required an operator to be licensed in one regulated jurisdiction to offer services in all regulated jurisdictions. This approach was criticised by Nick Tofiluk. “I don’t see much point in duplicating the work if another regulator has already carried out tasks such as due diligence”, he said.

The importance of player education in combating corruption was also raised. “The best defence is if the player says no”, said Simon Taylor, General Secretary of the Professional Players Federation, who also criticised the IOC and WADA for failing to engage with athletes. “The IOC has excelled itself in working with gambling companies, but has failed to engage with athletes”, he said. “However, to be fair, the IOC has not really been active in this market until very recently. Do we need another WADA? WADA has also failed to engage with athletes.”

Sir Ronnie Flanagan also pointed out a ‘catch 22’ that existed with regards to policing against corruption. “The ICC anti-corruption unit is independent, however our remit is international cricket”, he said. “The more we protect international cricket, the more likely we are to displace risk to other parts of the game. The ECB [England and Wales Cricket Board] has created its own integrity unit. In terms of the IPL [Indian Premier League], we’ve no remit, but we’ve covered it because the organisers wanted us to. We need to be alive to this threat of displacement.”

• A detailed programme for Sport & Gambling 2011 is available by clicking here. Copies of the presentations are available by contacting David Longford either by email, or by phoning +44 (0)20 7012 1382.

• World Sports Law Report and World Online Gambling Law Report also run a number of tailored events designed for their respective industries. For more information, click here.

FC Sion is planning to appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) after UEFA rejected its appeal against expulsion from the Europa League for fielding ineligible players on 13 September. "We will probably appeal against UEFA's decision to reject our appeal, but without much hope because it is our view that the CAS is not independent", said a spokesperson from FC Sion.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

UEFA is seeking an Integrity Affairs Lawyer who will work alongside Integrity Officers in all 53 Member Associations to combat potential match-fixing, it confirmed following its first Integrity Officers workshop on 15 September.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

International sporting federations, betting operators, regulators and more will gather at the Law Society offices in London on 29 September for Sport & Gambling 2011, a conference organised by World Sports Law Report and sister publication, World Online Gambling Law Report.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

Whilst there is a history of athletes using defamation to prevent the revelation of information that might damage their reputation, a number of sporting bodies have recently found themselves in a similar position. Tom Burrows, a Trainee Solicitor with Paris Smith LLP, examines the implications of the government's draft Defamation Bill for sport in the context of recent defamation claims involving the Rugby Football Union and the England and Wales Cricket Board.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

The UK government has launched a consultation on its proposals to expand the Gambling Commission's powers to share information on suspicious betting patterns with international sporting federations. Andrew Danson, a Senior Associate with K&L Gates, explains what has changed.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

The Turkish Public Prosecutor, Turkish Football Federation and UEFA have all become involved in sanctioning clubs and individuals for their alleged role in match fixing. E. Benan Arseven, a Partner with Moroglu Arseven, examines the investigations, regulations and rules behind these proposed sanctions. He explains how the Turkish Football Federation's decision to postpone its decision until it receives access to evidence accumulated by the public prosecutor could end up harming Turkish football further.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

Professor Ian Blackshaw, a member of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), outlines how the CAS ensures the independence of its Arbitrators. He also explains methods for challenging the independence of Arbitrators, highlighting that applicants must only provide reasons one might suspect bias to challenge the independence of an Arbitrator - proof of bias need not be provided.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

Scotland has introduced proposals for a new 'hate crime' offence specific to football supporters with the introduction of the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications Bill. Chris Anderson, an Associate with Brabners Chaffe Street LLP qualified in both Scotland and England, explains the reach of the new Bill.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

Andy Cunningham is Head of Integrity at Betfair and will be speaking at Sport & Gambling 2011, a conference taking place on 29 September at The Law Society in London. Andy will give a joint presentation on identifying suspicious betting patterns with Paul Scotney, Director of Integrity Services and Licensing at the British Horseracing Authority.

The conference is organised by World Sports Law Report and World Online Gambling Law Report. It will bring together key organisations from world sport to identify what gambling operators and sporting organisations can do to protect themselves against the possibility of corruption. The event is supported by Gold Sponsor DLA Piper and speakers include organisations such as:

• the British Gambling Commission;

• The International Association of Athletics Federations;

• French gambling regulator ARJEL;

• the Professional Players Federation;

• the British Horseracing Authority;

• Football DataCo;

• the British Sports Betting Integrity Panel;

• DLA Piper.

For a full programme, please click here. For more information on Sport & Gambling 2011, visit the conference page by clicking here.

In this interview, Andy outlines his background before joining Betfair, gives his view on how the gambling industry’s relationship has changed in the seven years he has been at Betfair and discusses whether an organisation such as the World Anti-Doping Agency is needed to tackle corruption in sport.

WSLR: Tell us a bit about your background...

AC: I graduated from University and started in the financial accounting world, joining Betfair in 2003. I have been there ever since, joining the Integrity Team in late 2004. I have progressed to head that team, which I have been doing for the last year.

I have a team of seven people, whose remit is to monitor all of the transactions on Betfair’s site and to investigate any unusual or suspect betting patterns. We liaise with sports governing bodies, regulators and law enforcement agencies, as appropriate, to help them carry out betting related integrity investigations.

In 2010 I spent six months in the US working for TVG, which was purchased by Betfair at the start of 2009. The company is one of the largest legal online pari-mutuel horseracing betting operators in the US. Whilst working for them I spent time engaging with horseracing regulators and implementing betting integrity related systems and procedures for the US pari-mutuel horseracing industry.

WSLR: What are you hoping to get out of the event?

AC: Networking with regulators and sports, primarily. I am sure that people will be there from some of the sports with which we have MOUs [Memorandums of Understanding] and also some of the regulators that we liaise with. I am also looking forward to networking with some of the other interesting parties that will be there. It will also be interesting to find out people’s latest views on the issues within the presentations.

WSLR: What do you anticipate questions on?

AC: My presentation will focus on what my team does to determine whether a bet is suspicious and the process of investigation that follows from that. I will talk about our MOUs and how we liaise with sport, regulators and law enforcement agencies if required. It’s difficult to predict what I might get questions on.

WSLR: What have been the biggest changes in sport’s relationship with gambling that you have seen?

AC: There has been increased cooperation on integrity related issues since I joined Betfair. Our number of MOUs has increased since 2004 when I joined the team – we now have them with 48 sporting bodies worldwide. Sports recognise that if they sign an MOU it acts as a safeguard in the fight against corruption. Most of the time we never have to use a MOU, but it allows us to share information with the sport involved and carry out an effective investigation if there is a betting integrity related issue. There has also been increased understanding that when we are talking about corruption in betting and sport, there is a clear distinction between the legal market and the illegal market. Regulated online companies in the legal market - such as Betfair - go to great lengths to police integrity and liaise with sports. It is in our mutual interest with sport to do so.

A recent Sky Sports News match-fixing report interviewed 'fixing insiders' and any mention of betting was with reference to the illegal industry in Asia rather than from the legal industry, which is here to help. If somebody were to cheat with us, we will catch them.

There has also been increased cooperation on educational initiatives in sport. For example we work in partnership with the Professional Players Federation on educating players and Simon Taylor may well speak about our work in that area at Sport & Gambling. This is a very important topic.

WSLR: Do you think there will ever be an international ‘anti-corruption’ body regulating sport’s relationship with gambling, as WADA regulates sport’s relationship with drugs?

AC: To set up a WADA-type organisation to tackle corruption would be incredibly complex. Also, some sports have established effective integrity units which have excellent relationships with gambling operators. I do agree that an international mechanism to ease the cross-border sharing of information would help but there are legal challenges that need to be overcome in this respect.

WSLR: Can sport and gambling’s relationship be mutually beneficial?

AC: From an integrity perspective, I believe sport and gambling’s relationship is already mutually beneficial. As described above it is in our interest as a licensed betting operator to help keep sport free from corruption. Gambling and sport has always had a kind of symbiotic relationship and I think it will continue to do so.

Interview by: Andy Brown

World experts on sport's relationship with gambling will converge in London on 29 September for Sport & Gambling 2011, a conference organised by World Sports Law Report and World Online Gambling Law Report and supported by gold sponsor, DLA Piper. The conference will address recent regulatory developments regarding sport and gambling's relationship. Speakers at the event will include:

• Nick Tofiluk, Director of Regulation - Gambling Commission

• Huw Roberts, Legal Counsel - IAAF 

• Paul Scotney, Director of Integrity Services and Licensing - British Horseracing Authority

• Will Lambe, Head of External Affairs - British Horseracing Authority

• Andy Cunningham, Head of Integrity - Betfair

• Cecile Thomas-Trophime, Head of Sports Department - ARJEL

• Simon Taylor, General Secretary - Professional Players Federations (PPF)

• Barry Johnston - International PR Manager, Sport+Markt

• Nick Fitzpatrick, Partner - DLA Piper

• Duncan Calow, Partner - DLA Piper

• Hilary Stewart-Jones, Partner - DLA Piper

• Stephen Ketteley, Partner - DLA Piper

UEFA has not said that it will investigate Manchester City's partnership with Etihad, despite reports to the contrary. In the BBC's interview with Jean-Luc Dehaene, the Chairman of UEFA's Financial Fair Play control panel said that he has questions about the deal, but did not actually say that UEFA would be investigating it directly. That is because UEFA's Financial Fair Play regulations do not work that way.

In the August edition of World Sports Law Report, Stephen Hornsby of Davenport Lyons highlights why a UEFA investigation of the deal is highly unlikely. Firstly, it is the club - not UEFA - which must demonstrate whether a sponsorship deal represents 'fair value' if the club itself flags up the deal as a 'related party' transaction. Under the UEFA Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations, Edition 2010, a 'related party' constitutes a close family member to club executives who either;

a) Has control or joint control over the reporting club;

b) Has significant influence over the club;

c) Is a member of key management personnel of the club or a parent of the club.

Therefore, unless Manchester City flag the deal as a 'related party' transaction, Manchester City will not have to demonstrate to UEFA that the deal represents 'fair value' and the sponsorship can proceed as normal.

Secondly, UEFA can only ask questions based on documentation received from a club under the UEFA Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations, Edition 2010. It doesn't have powers to investigate further than this. As we have already seen, unless a club flags a sponsorship deal as a 'related party' transaction, it is not required to demonstrate 'fair value' and UEFA will have no information to work with.

It is also important to remember that Manchester City has not announced the value of the Etihad partnership, and it is important that it is described as a 'partnership' and not a 'sponsorship' in the official release. As part of the 8 July deal, Etihad will also sponsor the development of the Etihad Campus around its stadium. This part of the deal is exempt from UEFA's Regulations in terms of assessing the 'fair value' of a sponsorship. Manchester City could claim that the deal is split into a shirt and stadium sponsorship that represents 'fair value' under the Regulations, and a 'partnership' to develop the Etihad Campus, which falls outside of the Regulations.

Jean-Luc Dehaene is a former politician and is unlikely to highlight that UEFA's rules represent a 'soft touch' approach to regulation, however it is disappointing to see the media not pressing him further for answers. It is especially disappointing to see media companies making assumptions based on what a politician has said.

Andy Brown

The International Basketball Federation (FIBA) approved transfer of players contracted to US National Basketball Association (NBA) clubs to other clubs whilst the NBA 'lockout' continues, however a 'return clause' could lead to contractual issues when the lockout ends.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

The Committee for Culture, Media and Sport (CCMS) has told the UK Government to abolish the Football Creditors rule in its Football Governance Report, published on 29 July. The recommendation follows a 27 July Supreme Court ruling questioning the legitimacy of the rule. This comes ahead of Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs (HMRC) 28 November High Court case against the Premier League's Football Creditors rule.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

The International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) will ban any athletes who refuse to take a blood test ahead of the 2011 World Championships in Daegu, Korea, 27 August to 4 September.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

French 1,500 metres runner Hind Dehiba was recently banned from taking part in the 30 June Athletissima meeting in Lausanne, Switzerland, due to a recommendation not to admit athletes who have served doping bans to events organised under the Euromeetings banner. Dehiba successfully challenged her exclusion, which endangered her ability to qualify for the World Championships by running under 4:02.50 before 15 August. Jorge Ibarrola, a founding partner of Libra Law, examines Dehiba's application under Swiss law, the reasoning behind the decision to order Athletissima to accept Dehiba's participation and the implications.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

Alex McLeish recently resigned as Manager of Birmingham City to join rival Aston Villa, citing constructive dismissal as his reason for terminating his contract prematurely. Meena Botros, an Associate with Norton Rose LLP, examines what constitutes constructive dismissal and previous case law involving football managers who have claimed that by its conduct, a club has breached its contract.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

The National Basketball Association has postponed the start of its season, as players and owners have failed to agree on a Collective Bargaining Agreement, which sets the contract terms between team owners and players. Paul J. Greene, an Attorney with Preti Flaherty and former sportscaster for Fox News, examines the implications that this 'lockout' could have for European basketball.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

Legislative protection against ambush marketing was promised by New Zealand in its bid to host the 2011 Rugby World Cup. However, the Major Events Management Act passed by government is over restrictive on small local businesses wishing to benefit from New Zealand's hosting of the tournament, writes David Hood, a Solicitor with Maria Clarke Lawyers. The Act is so restrictive and difficult to interpret that it may deter many local businesses from attempting to benefit from the tournament, argues Hood, while many small businesses used to carrying out marketing could fall foul of the Act through ignorance.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

New rules permitting the use of product placement in UK and Irish sports broadcasts were introduced earlier this year. Adam Finlay, a Solicitor with McCann Fitzgerald Solicitors, explains what is permitted under the new rules, the new opportunities they may present for sport and potential issues.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

There has been much speculation about whether UEFA will 'investigate' Manchester City's partnership with Etihad under its Financial Fair Play Regulations (FFPR). This follows suspicion that the value of the deal has been inflated to allow the club to continue to spend freely whilst meeting the 'break-even' requirements under the FFPR. Stephen Hornsby, head of the sports group at Davenport Lyons, explains that UEFA can only ask questions based on documentation received from the club under the FFPR, and can only assess the 'fair value' of any sponsorship deal if the club itself considers the deal to constitute a 'related party' transaction.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

Manchester City must satisfy UEFA that the management team behind its 10-year partnership with Etihad doesn't qualify as a 'related party' to City's owner, His Highness (HH) Sheikh Mansour Bin Zayed Al Nahyan, under the 2010 Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations (FFPR).

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

Gambling operators based outside of Great Britain (GB) will have to apply for a Gambling Commission licence to continue to take GB bets under plans announced by the UK government on 14 July.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

Team 2012 is reviewing its official media partnership with News International (NI) after the closure of the News of the World (NOTW) following the phone-hacking scandal, and is assessing new potential media partners.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

One of FIFA's key requirements for the hosting of its World Cup tournament is that FIFA and certain other entities receive exemption from certain taxes. Mansoor Parker, a Tax Executive at Edward Nathan Sonnenbergs and former Company Secretary for the 2010 FIFA World Cup Organising Committee South Africa, explains how South Africa coped with this requirement.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

The England and Wales High Court recently ordered the Health Professions Council to reconsider a decision to strike Stephen Brennan from its register of licensed physiotherapists for his role in fabricating a blood injury for Harlequins rugby union club. Chris Connolly, a Solicitor with A&L Goodbody, examines the decision.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

Marcel Seip was recently awarded over £72,000 in a breach of contract action against Blackpool Football Club after he was not paid a bonus due when the club secured promotion to the Football Association Premier League. Seip, who was on loan from Plymouth Argyle at the time, had been excluded from distribution of the £5.15 million promotion bonus pot by the club's 'bonus panel', who discounted loan players who had left the club at the end of the 2009/10 season. One of the lawyers that led the player's claim, Tim Copplestone of Clarke Willmott, explains the reasoning behind the award and the lessons it holds for clubs when drafting player bonus schedules.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

Buying a football club is different from other mergers and acquisitions deals, due to the specific regulations that surround football. David Roberts, a Corporate Partner with Olswang, examines issues that need addressing when purchasing a football club. He explains how the valuation of a club takes place; when the City Code on Takeovers and Mergers will apply; debt and the 'football creditors' rule; potential liabilities that clubs may have for players and more.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

The Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority (ASADA) replaced the Australian Sports Drug Agency (ASDA) in 2006 as one of the results from the 2004 inquiry into drug use by the Australian track cycling team. In the second instalment of a two-part article, Catherine Ordway, a Sport & Anti-Doping Consultant who previously worked with ASADA, examines how the limitations of ASDA were addressed when forming the new Authority.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

In March, the Football Association announced that it was charging Football League Championship leader Queens Park Rangers with breaches of its regulations regarding third party influence concerning the transfer of key striker Alejandro Faurlin to the club. QPR was successful in proving to the FA that third party interest in the player had been suspended for the duration of his three-year contract, and had since been 'bought out' by the club. Joseph Parks, a Trainee Solicitor at IPS Law LLP - which acted for the club - examines how the FA's decision to publicly announce the charges could have affected the case.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

Transparency is key to effective policing of player contracts, highlighted major sports organisations at Player Contracts 2011, a World Sports Law Report conference that took place in London on 7 July. Sporting bodies present included FIFA, UEFA, the European Club Association (ECA), FIFPro, the International Cricket Council, the Irish Rugby Football Union and more. The main points raised were:

• FIFA’s Transfer Matching System (TMS) needs to make changes to ensure financial transparency within the TMS system;

• UEFA’s Financial Fair Play regulations are unlikely to be effective and will cement the position of the richest clubs;

• Clubs are declaring their players as amateurs in order to avoid scrutiny under the TMS;

• TMS to be extended to include international transfer of female professionals and futsal players;

• More needs to be done to protect young players from exploitation;

• Training compensation is hampering big clubs from selling players to smaller clubs;

• Regulations on third party investment in football need clarifying;

• More needs to be done to compensate clubs for injuries attained during international duty.

In its presentation on its Transfer Matching System, FIFA highlighted that 4,600 clubs now use the TMS, which became mandatory for international transfers in 2010.  However, it was agreed that more needs to be done to ensure financial transparency in the system. FIFA said that it was working on a system whereby clubs would specify ‘approved accounts’ for player transfers, so that clubs could be confident that money was being paid to legitimate bank accounts.

The European Club Association (ECA) said it had evidence that payments are being made to third parties. It said FIFA needs to do more than the TMS requirement for clubs to tick a box agreeing not to make payments to third parties. “A box is a box”, said Isabelle Solal, Head of Integrity & Compliance for FIFA Transfer Matching System GmbH. “It is something we can use as evidence that a club has lied. It is something that we plan to use going forward during investigations.”

FIFA and the ECA also revealed they have evidence that clubs are getting around prohibitions on the transfer of young players by arranging jobs for player parents. FIFA Regulations prevent the international transfer of a player under the age of 16, unless the parents of the player move to a new country. FIFA and the ECA said that jobs are being arranged for parents, who move to a new country only for a local club to sign their son shortly after his 16^th birthday. In its presentation on protecting youth players, the ECA cited the cases of Paraguayan Carlos Javier Acuna Caballero, whose mother was allegedly offered a job in Cadiz prior to the player’s 16^th birthday ahead of FC Cadiz’s contract with the player after his 16^th birthday. The ECA also revealed that the Dutch authorities are investigating the transfer of Nathan Ake from Feyenoord to Chelsea, who was allegedly pictured on a football agent’s internet site at Chelsea’s Stamford Bridge ground prior to his 16^th birthday.

Delegates from smaller clubs raised a peculiar problem caused by FIFA’s requirement for compensation to be paid for the training of a player. Young players trained by a big club can often find themselves stranded, as smaller clubs cannot afford to pay the compensation. The abandonment of young players abroad was also raised as a potential problem, especially as UEFA’s Financial Fair Play Regulations are leading clubs to pursue ever-younger players in order to save money.

Other sessions discussed the impact of the Bribery Act on player contracts; managing rival competitions and calculating compensation for contract breaches.

Andy Brown

London’s 32 Boroughs were each offered the chance to buy a range of tickets to the London 2012 Olympics ahead of the first public ballot on 15 March, with 12 deciding to buy tickets to key events, revealed the appendix to a report published by the London Assembly and the Greater London Authority (GLA). News that some Boroughs decided to spend taxpayer money on key events before they were made available to the public is likely to increase concerns that the Olympic ballot process was not completely fair. News that some Boroughs are spending taxpayer money on Olympic tickets for local Mayors will anger many.

Of those 12 Boroughs taking up the offer to purchase tickets, just three secured sponsorship or other external funding for their tickets, revealed the follow up report to ‘Just the ticket? Report on the Ticketing Arrangements for the 2012 Olympic Games and Paralympic Games’, published by the London Assembly and GLA on 24 May. The biggest spender was Kensington & Chelsea, which spent £13,180 on 100 tickets for ‘outstanding young sports people in the borough and the volunteers and stalwarts, who are the backbone of our youth clubs’. The tickets will be Council funded, however the Borough said it is ‘seeking help with the funding’.

The Boroughs were free to use the tickets as they saw fit and whilst many stated that they felt it was unfair to spend taxpayer money on Olympic tickets whilst public services continue to be cut, others had different views, despite a warning in the original March ‘Just the ticket…’ report that public bodies should ‘show restraint’ when bidding for tickets. Merton ignored this advice and had planned to spend £3,980 on tickets for the opening and closing ceremonies for ‘the Mayor and consort’, however has recently reversed that decision following a public outcry, according to local reports. Of Ealing’s 37 tickets, two will be given to the Mayor and consort, whilst the rest will be given to children in Council care. Others – such as Lambeth (40) and Waltham Forest (44) – decided to donate their tickets to deserving members of the local community. Any tickets not bought were returned to the public ballot.

A form sent to each of the Boroughs reveals how they were allowed to cherry-pick some of the best Olympic events ahead of the public ballot. The 100 tickets on offer to each Borough included 16 for the Opening Ceremony; 10 for Cycling Track Finals; 64 for key Athletics Finals (including eight for the men’s 100m final); plus men’s football (8), diving (6), boxing (16) and basketball (2) finals. Any of these tickets bought were obviously taken out of the public ballot.

A Freedom of Information request made on 7 June revealed that Waltham Forest had spent £6,970 on 44 dream Olympic tickets for its lucky residents, which included six tickets at £150 each to the Opening Ceremony and two for 19 other key events such as the Cycling Finals, Men’s 100m Final and Closing Ceremony. These tickets will be funded by the taxpayer.

London 2012 refused to give details on how it decided which sporting events were included within 100 tickets offered for sale to each of London’s 32 Boroughs. “Tickets were offered across a range of events”, said a spokesperson, who refused to elaborate. As the 3,200 tickets were made available prior to the public sale and any not bought were returned to the public, they were allocated separately from the Government’s allocation of 8,815 tickets and the 500 tickets available for purchase by the GLA.

Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt outlined how the Government would distribute its tickets on 16 June. The Government will pay for 3,750 tickets, of which 450 will go to young people taking part in the School Games and 3,300 to ‘business leaders and dignitaries’. Staff working on the Games will be able to purchase 3,000 tickets and host towns and cities outside of London will be able to purchase 2,065. Five hundred tickets are also available for purchase by the GLA, which said it would fund any used through sponsorship.

Which London Boroughs Bought Olympic Tickets

Switzerland's federal sport office (BASPO) has delayed a report into whether the regulations of international sporting federations are adequate or whether legislation is needed until the autumn, following further allegations of corruption involving FIFA.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

Australian sporting organisations will be entitled to a financial return from betting, under national legislation that will stem from a National Policy on Match-Fixing in Sport, agreed by Australia's governments on 10 June. The Policy also may allow sporting bodies to sell the right to offer bets to operators, if Australia's eight governments decide to take that approach.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

Egyptian footballer Hossam Ghaly and a US runner were falsely found guilty of doping by a Malaysian laboratory accredited by the World AntiDoping Agency (WADA), the Court for Arbitration for Sport (CAS) ruled on 22 June. An appeal by the Doping Control Centre Penang against WADA's decision to revoke its licence was dismissed.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

The International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) recently released rules and guidelines designed to prevent women with elevated androgen levels from competing, which the International Olympic Committee (IOC) is also planning to adopt. Shawn Crincoli, an Associate Professor of Law at Touro Law Center, explains why the rules and guidelines are highly likely to violate non-discrimination laws in a number of jurisdictions.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

Educating players to recognise corrupt approaches to them is essential to maintaining the integrity of sport, as is education on the rules on betting. Simon Taylor of the Professional Players Federation and Jason Foley-Train of the Remote Gambling Association explain how the licensed betting industry and player federations have teamed up to educate players.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

The Finnish football association became the first national association to apply FIFA's Article 18bis when it expelled Tampere United from all competitions during 2011 for allowing a third party to influence its transfer policies. Pekka Aho, an Attorney with Studio Elsa Avvocati Associati, examines how Article 18bis was used to sanction Tampere United for becoming involved with a company suspected of match-fixing, and explains how Article 18bis could be used by other national associations in different situations in the future.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

The ad hoc division of the Court of Arbitration for Sport is used when disputes in sport need to be settled within 24 hours, such as during the Olympics or a similar major sports tournament. Jack Anderson, a Reader in Law at Queen's University Belfast's School of Law, examines how the ad hoc division operates; how the pressurised environment endemic to major sporting events can affect decisions; and how it is likely to be used during the London 2012 Olympics.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

Event organisers often assume that they are entitled to monopolise the rights in connection to their event, and can prevent unlicensed third parties from exploiting commercial rights in relation to the event. The recent 'Hartplatzhelden' federal court case in Germany challenges these preconceptions and also explores important questions about to whom football belongs, whether an overall protection for sports events infringes the principle of commercial freedom and more. Dr. André Soldner and Dr. Thomas C. Körber of Klinkert Zindel Partner explore these questions and assess whether sports events with free entry can protect their commercial rights, both adequately and legitimately.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

The Australian Sports Drug Agency (ASADA) replaced the Australian Sports Drug Agency in 2006 as one of the results from the 2004 inquiry into drug use by the Australian track cycling team. In the first instalment of a two-part article, Catherine Ordway, a Sport & Anti-Doping Consultant who previously worked with ASADA, examines the reasons why ASADA was established and how it planned to demonstrate organisational credibility.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the article. Click here to sign up for a free trial to World Sports Law Report.

An independent arbitration court will rule on Tampere United's appeal against its expulsion from all competitions by the Finland football association (SPL) for violating rules on third party influence before the end of May.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a free trial. 

The International Cricket Council (ICC) is investigating whether it should regulate the use of player agents after two national associations issued separate player agent regulations in response to last year's spot-fixing case involving player agent Mazhar Majeed.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a free trial. 

Licensed street traders face having to reapply for a licence to trade in public places within 'event zones' during the London 2012 Olympic Games under UK Government plans.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a free trial. 

England and Pakistan have recently become the first cricket playing countries to attempt regulation of the activities of agents. Amrut Joshi, an Advocate who heads the sports practice at MMB Legal, examines the regulations, the differences in the approaches of ECB and PCB and the rationale behind regulating the activities of agents. Joshi also draws a distinction between the philosophy behind the regulation of agents in cricket from the Transfer Matching System adopted by FIFA for the sport of football.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a free trial. 

The World Anti-Doping Code prohibits athletes declared ineligible due to a doping violation from participating in any activity organised by signatories to the Code during their period of ineligibility. FIFA, however, has rules allowing players declared ineligible for doping to resume training with their club before the end of their period of ineligibility. Dr. Volker Hesse, founder of VIVA Sports Law - Consulting, examines whether there is a case for allowing team sport players to resume training before the end of their ban, as it is argued that it is harder for them to maintain form outside of a club setting than it is for individual athletes to do the same.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a free trial. 

FIFA's announcement that it will donate €20 million to a ten-year programme launched in partnership with INTERPOL to tackle match fixing illustrates the financial power that professional sport can wield to tackle corruption and irregular betting. Amateur sport doesn't have the same resources, and it can be argued that its participants are more vulnerable to corruption as they are not paid. Matthew Nicholas and Amelia Lynch of Lander & Rogers Sports Business Group examine this and the difficulties in forming rules that are proportionate to both the professional and amateur side of sport.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a free trial. 

The Rugby Football Union has recently been successful in obtaining a Norwich Pharmacal Order requiring ticket resale site Viagogo to provide it with information regarding the resale of tickets to its events. Tom Burrows, a Trainee Solicitor with Paris Smith LLP, examines the case and the implications it could have for restrictions on reselling sporting event tickets, which is likely to become a big issue over the coming months as people receive their ticket allocations for the London 2012 Olympics.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a free trial. 

The Court of Arbitration for Sport has been asked to rule on the legitimacy of the IOC's Regulations Regarding Participation in the Olympic Games - Rule 45 of the Olympic Charter, which bans athletes convicted of doping from competing at the next edition of the Olympic Games. Alexandre Miguel Mestre, a Senior Associate with PLMJ, examines whether the so-called 'Osaka Rule' constitutes a disciplinary sanction or an eligibility condition, assessing whether it constitutes a violation of the common law principle that double punishments should be prohibited.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a free trial. 

Andy Brown

The International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) is confident that its rules on the eligibility of females with hyperandrogenism will withstand legal challenge when they are published on 1 May. Hyperandrogenism is a medical condition involving excessive production of hormones (androgens) such as testosterone.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a free trial. 

Tottenham Hotspur and Leyton Orient football clubs have sought High Court permission for judicial review of Newham's decision to take out a loan of up to £40 million for the redevelopment of the Olympic Stadium following the London 2012 Olympics. Newham Council has not lent West Ham United the money - a 'stadium company' will borrow the money from Newham and will rent the stadium to the club.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a free trial. 

Associate members of the International Cricket Council (ICC) are preparing to challenge a decision to exclude them from the 2015 Cricket World Cup at the ICC annual conference in June.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a free trial. 

Italian goalkeeper Morgan De Sanctis recently won a reduction in compensation due to his former club Udinese for breaching his contract under Article 17(3) of FIFA's Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players at the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). Ricardo Gentzsch, an Abogado with Schiller Abogados, examines the arguments of both clubs and the player against the compensation awarded by FIFA's Dispute Resolution Chamber, and explains how the CAS came to its decision.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a free trial. 

Leyton Orient and Tottenham Hotspur have launched applications in the High Court for judicial review of Newham Council's decision to loan £40 million to a 'Stadium Company' that will manage the redevelopment of London's Olympic Stadium after the London 2012 Olympic Games. Both clubs also plan to ask for judicial review of the Olympic Park Legacy Company's decision to accept West Ham United and Newham's bid to redevelop the stadium. Daniel York, a Solicitor with Field Seymour Parkes, examines the judicial review process and Leyton Orient's additional challenge based on the Premier League rules on relocation.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a free trial. 

UEFA and FIFA recently failed in an action challenging the 'listing' of the European Championships and World Cup as events of national importance that should be available on television to as wider section of the public as possible. Daniel Geey, a Solicitor with Field Fisher Waterhouse LLP, examines the legislation that allows 'listing' of sporting events and explains the European Union General Court's reasoning for rejecting the argument that only games featuring the national team can be considered of major importance for society.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a free trial. 

Alex Ferguson, Manager of Manchester United football club, recently received a five-match 'touchline ban' and a £30,000 fine for publicly criticising a match referee. The Football Association (FA) judged him to be in breach of rule E3, which prohibits actions judged as bringing the game into disrepute. Gregory Ioannidis and Geoffrey Alderman, of the University of Buckingham Law School, examine the legal and moral grounds for removing the right to free speech, the reasons for the FA's decision, whether the specificity of sport justifies the removal of such an important right and whether action is possible against the FA for abuse of power.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a free trial. 

The European Commission has launched a public consultation which invites views on a range of issues relating to online gambling. Two that will catch the eye of sports organisations are the principle of a 'fair return' for sports, and sponsorship by gambling operators. Andrew Danson, a Senior Associate at K&L Gates LLP, examines the issues and potential opportunities.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a free trial. 

One of most talked about incidents of this year’s UEFA Champions League occurred during a match between AC Milan and Tottenham Hotspur, where midfielder Gennaro Gattuso was punished by UEFA for his alleged head butt on Spurs coach Joe Jordan. However, whether you agree with the punishment or not, surely this is an incident that shouldn’t come under UEFA’s jurisdiction at all?

Granted, the incident occurred during one of the highest profile fixtures of the football calendar - you don’t get much bigger than the knock-out stages of the Champions League - but is the incident a football one, or no different to any other offence committed on the streets?

Following the issuing of Gattuso’s punishment, UEFA released a short statement clarifying its view of the situation. The statement read 'The control and disciplinary body ruled that Gattuso had assaulted the Tottenham Hotspur coach Joe Jordan after that match'.

It is the use of the word 'assaulted' that, in my view, raises questions about this incident. Assault is defined as an act carried out by a threat of bodily harm coupled with an apparent, present ability to cause harm. Surely grabbing an elderly man by the throat and proceeding to head butt him is a threat of bodily harm?

Some people may argue that this is a football incident as it occurred on the field of play. But this was not a flare up between two players, a late attempt to win the ball spilling over into violence. This was Gennaro Gattuso, an experienced professional footballer who has made 395 club and 73 international appearances, purposefully coming to the edge of the field to confront a man who, to all intents and purposes, could have little impact on the game.

If this incident had occurred in a different setting, on a different occasion, then surely this is a criminal offence? Why does the hallowed turf of the San Siro make any difference to how the incident should be seen in the eyes of the law?

Obviously there has been a huge amount of discussion and arguments over the days and weeks following the game, a shame given that they somewhat overshadowed a fantastic away Champions League performance by Spurs.

Whilst the general consensus seemed to be that Gattuso had acted stupidly, that this is rightly an incident unwelcome within the game, these major excuses or accusations seems to be missing the point somewhat. Whilst those may argue that as an experienced professional footballer Gattuso should know better than to start causing trouble with the opposition’s coach. However, whether Gattuso attacks Joe Jordan or boxer David Haye, the law is still the same. Violence is a not a part of football, and therefore cannot be solely punished by those responsible for the sport.

Gattuso may consider himself unlucky to be punished in such a way that could prevent him from playing in another Champions League in his career. But he should consider himself lucky to still have the chance to play another game of professional football again.

Ashley Burtoft, student

BSc(Hons) Sport Science and Management

School of Science and Technology, Nottingham Trent University

Editor comment: Ashley raises an important issue with this article – where should the line be drawn between sports regulations and the law? As Ashley rightly points out, should UEFA be punishing players for incidents that take place off the field of play and could have resulted in a criminal prosecution had they occurred in any other setting? The fine line between sports regulation and 'formal' areas of the law is increasingly being tested. Alex Ferguson has recently been issued with a fine and a touchline ban for criticising a referee. In the April edition of World Sports Law Report, we will examine whether this constitutes a restriction on his freedom of speech.

Many thanks to Ashley for raising this important issue, which we will explore in future editions of World Sports Law Report in closer detail. If YOU are a student studying sports law, management or regulation and you have an issue that you feel needs exploring and you would like to see published on this blog, please email a synopsis to Andy Brown, Editor of World Sports Law Report.

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) Task Force formed to tackle illegal sports betting will consider three options designed to tackle the problem at its next meeting, the date of which has yet to be set.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a free trial. 

The Association of Tennis Professionals (ATP) is seeking close to $500,000 in legal fees from five Italian tennis players it suspended for gambling on tennis, after a Florida court dismissed their case against the manner in which they were convicted.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a free trial. 

The European Club Association has welcomed a 28 February Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) decision as encouraging respect for contracts and stability in football, after it reduced compensation due to Italian club Udinese after Morgan de Sanctis breached his contract.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a free trial. 

UEFA has recently brought into force its Financial Fair Play Regulations, which are designed to encourage clubs to operate on the basis of their own revenues in order to protect them from excessive debt. Stephen Hornsby, head of the sports group at Davenport Lyons, explains why the regulations could be challenged by a club excluded from European competition for failing to comply with them. He argues that they don't represent a fair and proportionate restriction on a club's ability to compete under competition law, especially as they were only agreed by European Club Association members.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a free trial. 

In part 1 of this two-part article Mike Morgan, an Associate with Squire Sanders Hammonds, examined the background to WADA's 'Similar Substances' provision and the application of the provision in three case studies. In this second instalment, he analyses the rationale of those decisions and the steps that must be taken to ensure that the application of the Similar Substances provision complies with general principles of law.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a free trial. 

The Asian Council of Arbitration for Sports (ACAS) was established last year to manage a Sports Arbitration Tribunal of Asia, which has the support of the Olympic Council of Asia for settling sports disputes ahead of the Court of Arbitration for Sports (CAS). Alexandre Miguel Mestre, a Senior Associate with PLMJ Sociedade de Advogados RL, Lisbon, examines whether Asia has a case for establishing such an arbitration court for settling sports disputes. He explains why the ACAS may weaken the CAS, slow down the decision-making process and may even breach the Olympic Charter through its establishment.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a free trial. 

The recent rise in social media has enabled players to get closer than ever to their fans, and vice-versa. Leslie Ross examines the dangers that holds, recent incidents involving social media and sport's policies on its use. She also examines sport's rules on social media use in the light of freedom of expression legislation and whether instant messaging can be regulated by sport, as it is a 'private' form of social media.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a free trial. 

The new Bribery Act is scheduled to come into effect across the UK later this year, and will have a significant impact on sport. Chris Brightling, a Trainee Solicitor with Field Seymour Parkes, examines how new provisions in the Act could create difficulties for sport and could lead to a number of test cases reaching the courts before the London 2012 Olympics.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a free trial. 

The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) will have no choice to uphold the appeal of the Union Cycliste International (UCI) against the Spanish cycling federation’s (RFEC) to overturn a ban on the cyclist for ingesting Clenbuterol. It doesn’t matter that Contador didn’t intend to ingest the substance or enhance his performance, which is reportedly the defence that his lawyer will offer when the case comes before the CAS. In fact, that defence will not help Contador at all.

As I pointed out in a news article written at the time of Contador’s positive ‘A’ sample in October last year: ‘Clenbuterol is listed as a prohibited substance on WADA's Prohibited List. Under UCI rules, use of a prohibited substance carries a two-year ban (para. 293), unless the cyclist can provide evidence that the substance entered his body accidentally and was not intended to enhance performance (para. 295).’ Contador’s defence team will find it very hard to prove that he ingested clenbuterol through contaminated meat. For one thing, Contador consumed the meat so no evidence of it exists. Clenbuterol’s use in animal feed is banned by the European Union and although it is widely accepted that it is still illegally used in some countries, finding proof of that will be near impossible, especially given the media coverage that the Contador case has received.

According to the Telegraph’s article, however, that is not the defence that Contador’s legal team will pursue. They will attempt to argue that Contador didn’t intend to ingest the substance or enhance his performance. It is worth pointing out here that the CAS is not a court of law – it only serves to ascertain whether the rules of sporting bodies have been correctly followed, not whether the rules are just and fair. In this case, the UCI’s rules have been correctly followed.

Andy Brown

Tackling Doping in Sport packed over 200 delegates into Twickenham Stadium’s conference facilities in a hugely successful two-day event that highlighted the new challenges presented by doping, and new methods of tackling them. The expert line up of speakers at the sell-out event attracted delegates from Bermuda, the US, Australia, Russia, South Africa, New Zealand, Qatar, Puerto Rico, Brazil as well as from European countries, international sporting federations, national associations, governments and more.

One of the major themes was that doping is now part of a wider problem of corruption in sport. In an illuminating keynote speech David Howman, Director General for the World Anti-Doping Agency, warned that the criminal underworld is now “controlling a significant proportion of world sport” through trafficking prohibited substances, match fixing and bribing laboratory officials, as “the return on investment is huge”. He warned that this black market is now controlling 25% of world medicine. Andy Parkinson, CEO of UK Anti-Doping, said that sport is tackling this problem by “moving away from focussing on the end user to focussing on the supply chain. If sport thinks that it can solve doping on its own, then it is foolishly deluded. The impact that law enforcement has had in the last 18 months has been incredible. It has provided a much-needed sharpness to what we do.”

The use of athlete biological passports to provide an indication that an athlete may have been involved in doping was another key issue. Howman highlighted how a key decision from the Court of Arbitration for Sport supporting the use of such passports in convicting two Italian cyclists for doping had “validated” the use of such passports. He thanked the Union Cycliste Internationale for investing the money in launching the passports without any guarantee that their use would be supported by a court of law, and that he expected other sports to begin investing in them soon. Delegates were warned that biological passports should not be used as the sole method for convicting an athlete of doping.

Hugh Robertson, UK Minister for Sport and the Olympics, revealed that the UK Government is open to the possibility of passing legislation criminalising anti-doping. “If – as a result of work done by the Council of Europe and the European Union – it is suggested that there are things we need to do, then we will do them”, he said in response to a question about whether criminal legislation was needed to tackle doping.

One of the most popular and most discussed sessions was a series of round-table debates on aspects of the World Anti-Doping Code that need revising, which filled the room with a buzz of conversation. Popular topics included resumption of training following a ban and altering sanctions given to athletes following ‘aggravating circumstances’ or ‘substantial assistance’.

Tackling Doping in Sport 2011 was organised by World Sports Law Report in association with UK Anti-Doping and Squire Sanders Hammonds. It received international news coverage from the BBC, Sky News, The Guardian, The Independent, Reuters, Television New Zealand and more. Tackling Doping in Sport is just one of World Sports Law Report’s annual conferences. Others include Player Issues: Regulations and Contracts and Sport, Gambling and Sponsorship.

• For more information on World Sports Law Report events or if you are interested in taking part in next year’s Tackling Doping in Sport, contact Erika Joyce on +44 (0)20 7012 1383 or erika.joyce@e-comlaw.com. Fore more information on discussions at Tackling Doping in Sport 2011, contact Andy Brown on +44 (0)20 7012 1380 or andrew.brown@e-comlaw.com.

NOTES FOR EDITORS

Other highlights from Tackling Doping in Sport 2011 included:

-          A method that has the potential for detecting gene doping in sport using a molecular biological approach was presented by Professor Perikles Simon of Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz. Gene doping was previously thought to be undetectable.

-          London 2012 will involve a higher number of drug tests on athletes than ever before, revealed Richard Budgett, Chief Medical Officer for the London Organising Committee for the Olympic Games. 5,000 athletes will be tested, as compared to the 4,500 tested at Beijing 2008. 1,250 tests will be conducted during the Paralympics. Ten mobile anti-doping teams will also be used.

-          There is a need for new markers to be brought into the athlete biological passport to combat ‘Microdosing’, which involves using small amounts of Erythropoietin (EPO) that are difficult to detect using current methods.

-          Governing bodies need to tread a fine line between publicising positive athlete tests in order to limit damage and protecting the athlete. England Hockey gave an example where it was considering publicising a positive ‘A’ sample find from an athlete. It decided not to and the ‘B’ sample came back negative. “We could have ruined that person’s life”, said Sally Munday, CEO of England Hockey.

-          To state that any food or supplement is ‘100% safe’ for athletes to consume is very difficult, if not impossible.

-          Contaminated food presents a problem for athletes, as do supplements, which can be contaminated with other substances.

-          The standard of care that an athlete can expect from a sporting body during the doping control process has now been ‘Codified’, which means that athletes may be able to hold sporting bodies liable if these standards have not been adhered to.

-          As well as the problem of false positive tests, a problem now exists with false negatives, as people are scared to report a positive test due to the ensuing legal process that will result from it.

-          Whether there is a need to adapt the World Anti-Doping Code to regulate the use of technology in sport, as it can provide an unfair advantage or even endanger the health of athletes.

The International Football Association Board (IFAB) will meet in Newport, Wales tomorrow to again consider whether football should adopt goal-line technology, which will determine whether a ball has crossed the line in situations where the referee might be unsure. The use of goal-line technology has been being discussed by the IFAB since 2007 (perhaps earlier) and from all the discussion that has surrounded it, a casual observer might be forgiven for thinking that football is plagued by hundreds of decisions each weekend where the referee cannot determine confidently whether to award a goal.

The reality is somewhat different. Any football fan will tell you that dubious penalties far eclipse incidents where it cannot be determined whether the ball has crossed the line. They will also tell you that in both situations, TV cameras instantly replay footage of the incident, allowing home viewers to determine whether the correct decision has been made. Viewers at home were able to see clearly that England’s Frank Lampard scored a goal against Germany and Mexico were furious after an in-stadium big screen showed everyone that Argentina’s Carlos Tevez was offside when scoring during the 2010 FIFA World Cup. FIFA’s response? Let’s censor in-stadium screens.

It is also dubious as to how far down the football pyramid goal-line technology will be used. Who will make the decision on whether it is introduced? If it is the national association, then the Football Association has a big investment ahead ensuring that everyone from Manchester United to Walthamstow Avenue is equipped with the technology. If it is up to the leagues, then where will the line be drawn?

Most top-level football is televised – if not by a broadcaster, then increasingly by a club’s own TV channel or internet site. Replaying such incidents would not delay the game any longer than determining the results from goal-line technology systems. As it wouldn’t cost anything, why not use them? It is precisely because it wouldn’t cost anything that FIFA will not use television reviews. Tomorrow, FIFA will hear a report from ten companies keen to sell their system to football. Although it would provide the same result, using television reviews would not bring any new money into football.

FIFA’s motto is ‘for the good of the game’, yet it is happy to support a system that will cost lots of money, will sort out only a small fraction of wrong decisions and will allow diving and cheating to continue unpunished. A fairer system might be to allow team captains to challenge three decisions during a match, which will then be replayed if the game is being filmed. That way, diving and unjust penalties would also be caught, which can have just as much of an impact on a match as a wrongly-awarded goal.

Andy Brown

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) and the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) have called for the establishment of an international body to tackle the threat posed to the integrity of sport by match fixing.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a two-week free trial. 

The Football League is concerned that Premier League plans to introduce a tier-based system of youth academies will prevent its clubs from signing the best youth players, and that a new system of compensation for training young players doesn't do enough to encourage clubs to develop talent.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a two-week free trial. 

World Sports Law Report is proud to announce that world experts on anti-doping will be converging in London for Tackling Doping in Sport on 16/17 March, organised in association with UK Anti-Doping and Squire Sanders Hammonds. Speakers include David Howman (WADA); Pat McQuaid (UCI); Elise Auvachez (UNESCO); Hugh Robertson (DCMS); Stéphane Bermon (IAAF); Andy Parkinson (UKAD); Travis Tygart (USADA); Aurora Andruska (ASADA); Jan-Anders Månson (FINA) and more.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a two-week free trial. 

As well as publishing a 'Prohibited List' of substances, the World Anti-Doping Agency also prohibits use of 'Similar Substances'; substances which carry a similar chemical structure or have similar biological effects to those listed on the Prohibited List. In the first instalment of a two-part article, Mike Morgan, an Associate with Squire Sanders Hammonds, examines the background to the provision and the difficulties that the application of the provision can cause for athletes.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a two-week free trial. 

The London Organising Committee recently announced plans to change the route of the London 2012 Olympic Marathon to finish by Buckingham Palace on The Mall, rather than in the Olympic Stadium in Stratford. The move led a number of London Olympic boroughs, which had begun work on preparing for the passage of the Marathon, to call for a judicial review into the decision. Simon Grove, a Solicitor with Harrison Clark LLP's Commercial Department, examines whether the Olympic boroughs had a case.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a two-week free trial. 

In a recent Opinion issued in the Murphy/QC Leisure case currently before the Court of Justice of the European Union, the Advocate General has stated that the licensing of exclusive sports media rights on a territory-by-territory basis in Europe is contrary to EU law. Andrew Danson, an Associate with K&L Gates LLP, examines the opinion and its potential consequences for sports rights holders and broadcasters.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a two-week free trial. 

The International Cricket Council recently delivered its verdict in the spot-fixing case against three Pakistan cricketers, imposing sanctions of varying severity. Amrut Joshi, an Advocate who heads the sports practice at MMB Legal, examines the charges brought against the players, the evidence against them and how sanctions were determined by considering both 'aggravating and mitigating factors', as required by the ICC's Anti-Corruption Code. Joshi also comments on steps that could be taken by the ICC to prevent such a situation from arising in the future.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a two-week free trial. 

The London Olympic Games and Paralympics Games Act 2006 protects the London Olympics from ambush marketing and seeks to stop brands that are rivals to London 2012 official sponsors from associating themselves with the event. Hugh Tebay, a Founding Partner of Sipara, examines the impact that the measures within this Act will have on the ordinary spectator.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a two-week free trial. 

German free-to-air broadcasters ARD & ZDF will abandon live coverage of the Tour de France in 2012, due to concerns over doping. ‘The focus is often doping, to which the audience lends an understandably critical eye’, said the state broadcasters in a 2 February statement. ‘German TV viewers only have a low acceptance of the most important cycling race in the world and as such, the long live transmission lines are no longer justified’. The broadcasters will continue to cover the tour in news reports.

Both broadcasters have refused to join a new contract between the European Broadcasting Union (EBU) – which represents national broadcasters such as the BBC – and Amaury Sports Organisation (ASO), which oraganises the Tour. As such, they will still cover the 2011 edition of the Tour, which runs 2 July to 24 July. The contract between the EBU, ASO and national broadcasters allows withdrawal if riders are implicated in doping. Both broadcasters withdrew from covering the 2009 edition of the Tour due to concerns over doping.

The withdrawal demonstrates the commercial impact that doping can have on sport. This will be one of the many issues discussed at Tackling Doping in Sport 2011, organised by World Sports Law Report in Association with UK Anti-Doping and Squire Sanders Hammonds on 16-17 March 2011.

The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) was not consulted about the formation of an Asian Council of Arbitration for Sports (ACAS) last year, which will manage a Sports Arbitration Tribunal of Asia (SATA) to settle sports-related disputes.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a two-week free trial. 

US broadcaster ESPN has asked a Federal Court to unseal documents that allegedly reveal which elite Association of Tennis Professionals (ATP) players gambled on the sport.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a two-week free trial. 

An investigation by Norway's data protection authority, Datatilsynet, has revealed that FIFA insiders offered to sell details of ticket purchasers to the 2006 FIFA World Cup. A 2010 investigation by the UK's Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) and Datatilsynet found personal details and passport numbers of UK ticket buyers were obtained from German company CTS Eventim and passed on to Norwegian company Euroteam AS.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a two-week free trial. 

Walls v Brown is the first Scottish case where a sectarian-aggravated breach of the peace conviction - which resulted in the imposition of a football banning order - has been upheld on appeal. Dr David McArdle, a Senior Lecturer at the University of Stirling School of Law, examines the High Court decision and the grounds upon which the Sheriff had granted the banning order application.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a two-week free trial. 

The International Cricket Council's Anti-Corruption and Security Unit (ACSU) was formed in 2000 to combat corruption in cricket. Amrut Joshi, an Advocate who heads the sports practice at MMB Legal, examines the reasons for its formation, its role to date and whether enough has been done by cricket's authorities to tackle the threat of corruption.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a two-week free trial. 

We asked members of World Sports Law Report's editorial board to highlight what they think will be the main sports law issues during 2011. In this article, they set out their responses.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a two-week free trial. 

It has recently been proposed that lie-detector tests be used in cricket to tackle corruption. Tom Burrows, a Trainee Solicitor with Paris Smith LLP, examines how a lie-detector works, the questions that have been raised over the accuracy of such tests and whether they are accepted as evidence by the courts. He also questions how the ICC would implement non-compulsory use of lie-detectors in anti-corruption investigations as refusal could be seen as admission of guilt, and points out that the International Cricket Council could face compensation claims should a player be able to subsequently prove his innocence after taking a test.

If you are a subscriber to World Sports Law Report, click here to access the full article, or click here to sign up for a two-week free trial.