BOA v WADA: Harmonisation v Self-Regulation
Main Article Content
Abstract
The area of anti-doping in sport has always been fascinating, exciting, as well as complicated and controversial. The two latter aspects have been entrenched, in case law and statutory law and the highest Court in sport, namely the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), in Lausanne, Switzerland. This court has had the opportunity to develop important principles of sports law. One of these principles is the subject matter of the present case commentary and relates to the principle of self-regulation. In other words, it examines the ability of sporting governing bodies to regulate their sport and concentrates on the legality of such self-regulation. In doing so, this case commentary will also examine the particular importance sports law jurisprudence attaches on the contractual relationship between sporting governing bodies and athletes. Such analysis should help readers understand the nature of regulation in sport, as well as the reasoning behind the decision of the Court of Arbitration for Sport in the case under analysis.
Article Details
Issue
Section
Commentaries
Authors retain the copyright and grant to the Journal the right to publish under license.
Authors retain the right to use their article (provided you acknowledge the published original in standard bibliographic citation form) in the following ways, as long as you do not sell it or give it away in ways that would conflict with our commercial business interests:
internal educational or other purposes of your own institution or company;
mounted on your own or your institutions website;
posted to free public servers of preprints and or article in your subject area;
or in whole or in part, as the basis for your own further publications or spoken presentations.