You are receiving this email because you signed up for our newsletter at www.sportslawandpolicycentre.com

If you wish not to receive this newsletter anymore, please reply to this email with "UNSUBSCRIBE" in the Subject field or in the body of the email.

For further information about the INTERNATIONAL SPORTS LAW AND POLICY BULLETIN, please contact the Editorial Board at info@sportslawandpolicycentre.com

Thanks

In this issue:

IN THE SPOTLIGHT

INTERNATIONAL SPORTS LAW AND POLICY BULLETIN 1/2025

ISBN 978-88-943373-8-9

August 2025, 456 pages

Free e-book in open access

Executive Summary

EUR 120.00 plus shipment costs for printed version

ORDER FORM

LEGAL ANALYSIS

Rivista di Diritto ed Economia dello Sport 2025

SPORTS ARBITRATION AND EFFECTIVE JUDICIAL PROTECTION UNDER EU LAW:
THE RFC SERAING CASE

by Stefano Bastianon and Michele Colucci

AVAILABLE IN OPEN ACCESS

Full Professor of European Union Law at the University of Bergamo (Italy) and an arbitrator of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). He is an attorney-at-law and co-founder of the law firm Bastianon-Garavaglia in Busto Arsizio (Italy). He is a member of the Steering Committee of the Rivista di Diritto Sportivo and of the Scientific Committee of the Rivista di Diritto ed Economia dello Sport, where he also holds the position of Scientific Co-Director.








Co-founder and Honorary President of the Italian Association of Sports Lawyers (AIAS). He is the General Editor of the International Encyclopeadia of Sports Law (https://www.ielaws.com) and Scientific Co- Director of the Rivista di Diritto ed Economia dello Sport (https://www.rdes.it).
The information and views expressed are those of the authors and do not reflect the official position of their institution and associations.
The authors wish to sincerely thank Durante Rapacciuolo and Paolo Stancanelli for their thoughtful and insightful comments.

Abstract

The Grand Chamber judgment of 1 August 2025 in the Royal Football Club Seraing SA v FIFA, UEFA, URBSFA case constitutes a further step in the Court of Justice’s case-law on the relationship between international sports arbitration – particularly before the Court of Arbitration for Sport – and the system of judicial protection mandated by EU law. Building on the International Skating Union v Commission case, the Court of Justice reaffirmed that arbitral awards applying EU law must remain subject to review by a court entitled to make a preliminary reference under Article 267 TFEU and competent to verify compliance with EU public policy. This commentary situates Seraing within the existing doctrinal framework, compares it to previous case-law, and evaluates the potential impact on sports arbitration.

Keywords

Sports arbitration – Judicial review – EU public policy.

THE SEMENYA V. SWITZERLAND ECTHR GRAND CHAMBER JUDGEMENT:
JURISDICTION, PROCEDURAL RIGHTS, AND SPORTS ARBITRATION

by Stefano Bastianon and Michele Colucci

AVAILABLE IN OPEN ACCESS

Full Professor of European Union Law at the University of Bergamo (Italy), CAS Arbitrator and member of the “Collegio di Garanzia dello Sport del CONI” (Italian highest Sports Court of the Italian Olympic Committee). He is an Attorney-at-law and co-founder of the Law Firm Bastianon-Garavaglia in Busto Arsizio (Italy). He is a member of the Steering Committee of the Rivista di Diritto Sportivo and the Scientific Committee of the Rivista di Diritto ed Economia dello Sport.








co-founder and Honorary President of the Italian Association of Sports Lawyers (AIAS). Editor of the International Encyclopaedia of Sports Law (Kluwer Law International), and Scientific Director of Rivista di Diritto ed Economia dello Sport (www.rdes.it).
The authors wish to sincerely thank Daniel Rietiker and Durante Rapacciuolo for their invaluable and insightful comments.
Views expressed are solely those of the authors and do not reflect those of their institutions and associations.

Abstract

This paper analyses the Grand Chamber judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the Semenya v. Switzerland case, a landmark ruling clarifying the States’ obligation regarding international sports arbitration under the European Convention on Human Rights. The judgement distinguishes procedural from substantive Convention rights in terms of jurisdiction, holding Switzerland responsible under Article 6, paragraph 1, for insufficient judicial review of a CAS award while rejecting jurisdiction over alleged violations of Articles 8, 14, and 13. The Authors focus on key aspects of the ruling, namely: (i) the non-issue of CAS independence and impartiality in the case at stake, (ii) the absence of a territorial link for substantive rights,(iii) the existence of a territorial link for procedural rights, (iv) the emerging doctrinal distinction between these rights, (v) the narrow scope of Swiss judicial review, (vi) and the fact that the Differences of Sex Development regulations remain valid and unchallenged.

Keywords

Human Rights – Arbitration – Jurisdiction – Public Policy – Fair Trial.

ATHLETE INVESTMENT CONTRACTS, UNCONSCIONABILITY, AND CONSUMER PROTECTION:
AN EU-US COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS BETWEEN THE ARCE CASE AND BIG LEAGUE ADVANCE (BLA) MODEL

by Stefano Bastianon and Michele Colucci


AVAILABLE IN OPEN ACCESS

Full Professor of European Union Law at the University of Bergamo (Italy), CAS Arbitrator and member of the “Collegio di Garanzia dello Sport del CONI” (Italian highest Sports Court of the Italian Olympic Committee). He is an Attorney-at-law and co-founder of the Law Firm Bastianon-Garavaglia in Busto Arsizio (Italy). He is a member of the Steering Committee of the Rivista di Diritto Sportivo and the Scientific Committee of the Rivista di Diritto ed Economia dello Sport.








Honorary President of the Italian Association of Sports Lawyers (AIAS).
The Opinions expressed are those of the author and do not represent the position of any affiliated institution and association.

Abstract

This article explores the legal and ethical implications of long-term commercial contracts involving young athletes, focusing on the recent Arce judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union. The ruling significantly advances the application of EU Directive 93/13 on unfair terms in consumers contracts within the sports ecosystem, particularly regarding the classification of “raising star” athletes as consumers and the fairness of long-term remuneration clauses. Emphasising clarity, transparency, and good faith, the Court of Justice sets important criteria for assessing such agreements, especially when minors are involved. The analysis covers the U.S. context, assessing similar investment models and the so-called Name, Image and Likeness (NIL)-based deals, with attention to the Big League Advance business model and related litigation. These cases highlight regulatory gaps on both sides of the Atlantic concerning third-party control over athlete careers. The Authors advocate for harmonised safeguards and oversight to ensure that these contracts are appropriate to support the sports development of athletes, legally sound, and ethically justifiable..

Keywords

Sport – Minors – Consumer Protection – Career Development Scheme.

PUBLICATIONS

SLPC 2024

ISBN 978-88-943373-7-2

FLYER - TEASER - ORDER FORM

International Encyclopaedia of Sports Law

Edited by M. Colucci



FLYER

From Lausanne to Luxembourg:
the CJEU’s Seraing Judgment and the Boundaries of Sports Arbitration Under EU Law

by Stefano Bastianon

Call for Papers

From Kickoff to Consensus:
The 2026 FIFA World Cup and North American Cross-Border Cooperation

University of Houston Law Center on March 13–14, 202