Onside Law Partner, Jamie Singer considers the German Courts’ recent intervention re Olympic marketing restrictions.
Rule 40 of the Olympic Charter is famous, or perhaps infamous, in sponsorship circles. It imposes some of the most onerous marketing restrictions in sport. Those restrictions have now been challenged by the German competition courts.
Onside Law’s Stevie Loughrey comments on the recent allegations about Saracens in relation to Premiership Rugby’s salary cap.
On 3 March 2019, the Daily Mail ran an article asking “Have Saracens broken salary cap rules?” The article noted that Saracens owner Nigel Wray owns businesses with four England players Owen Farrell, Billy and Mako Vunipola and Richard Wigglesworth. As the title of the piece suggests, the Daily Mail itself is not sure whether such arrangements represent a breach of the salary cap rules. With a squad filled with internationals and a cabinet full of trophies it is easy to question Saracens. However, the aim of this article is to demystify what the rules say, explain the processes followed and to analyse the allegations made against the club.
Senior Associate, Harriet Leach writes on: What eligibility criteria should sporting federations establish to govern the participation of athletes, just for being themselves?
Banned for being yourself
Last month (February 2019), the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Lausanne, Switzerland (“CAS”) heard the high profile case of Caster Semenya v International Association of Athletics Federations (“IAAF”).
Semenya, a woman with hyperandrogenism (naturally high testosterone levels) who has dominated women’s middle distance running for a decade, is challenging the “IAAF Eligibility Regulations for Female Classification (Athletes with Differences of Sex Development)” (“Regulations”). If brought into force, the Regulations would require Semenya to medically lower her testosterone levels to be able to compete at her preferred distance in international competitions, or compete in men’s events.
The sporting world eagerly awaits CAS’ decision, due later this month. Not only will the ruling be hugely significant for Semenya but it will also have wide-ranging implications for sport and how to categorise gender in elite competition. Should sport be gender-segregated (and, if so, what should the eligibility criteria be), or should different methods of classification be trialled (for example, the Paralympic system)? Sporting federations need to be live to the issues, consider the repercussions for their sport and be ready to act, if they are not already doing so.