Latest Posts
Quastels Advises on Partnership Between ELEMIS & Aston Martin Aramco Formula One™ Team
Quastels are proud to have advised on the new multi-year partnership between Aston Martin Aramco Formula One™ Team, and our long-term client, ELEMIS. Led by Corporate & Commercial Legal Director Ann-Maree Blake, the deal sees ELEMIS become the first Official Skincare Partner of Aston Martin Aramco Formula One™ Team, tapping into the growing female fan-base of the sport.
ELEMIS Champions Inclusivity in F1
ELEMIS, through this trailblazing partnership, are working to promote inclusivity within Formula 1, as the latest study suggests that the fastest growing fanbase are women aged 16 to 24, and that the female demographic now make up 41% of the sport’s overall fanbase. Ann-Maree led contract negotiations on behalf of ELEMIS, ensuring the B Corp company’s sustainability focus was spotlighted in the deal, meeting with Aston Martin Aramco’s own sustainability goals. This partnership not only marks an incredible milestone in the world of Formula 1 but also sets a new standard for innovation, sustainability, and inclusivity within the sport.
The deal includes ELEMIS launching exclusive, limited-edition product collections, offering guests at the Aston Martin Aramco Paddock Club Suite experiential treatments, and in May, at the Monaco Grand Prix, ELEMIS will create a luxury spa experience on board the Aston Martin Aramco yacht- all within the first year of the partnership.
Testimonial
“Working with Ann-Maree Blake at Quastels was nothing short of extraordinary. Her unparalleled expertise, strategic vision, and tireless commitment to our success transformed what could have been a complex deal into a flawless, high-impact partnership with the Aston Martin Aramco Formula One™ Team. Ann-Maree went above and beyond, not just meeting but exceeding our expectations at every turn. Her insight, professionalism, and passion for excellence made her an indispensable part of this landmark deal. Simply put, she is the gold standard in legal support.”
Sean C. Harrington, ELEMIS Co-Founder & CEO.
Read More
Real-Time Rulings: How the CAS ‘Ad Hoc’ Division Resolves Urgent Sports Disputes
On Saturday, American gymnast Jordan Chiles was stripped of her women’s floor bronze medal following a ruling by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) Ad Hoc Division. The fact that this decision was based on a technicality proved particularly contentious; it is unusual for Olympians to get stripped of their medals for reasons unconnected to doping or cheating. What was initially celebrated as the first all-black podium in Olympic gymnastics has become overshadowed by the controversy, with Chiles facing a slew of online abuse in yet another reminder of the challenges that black athletes continue to face.
The CAS ‘Ad Hoc Division’ is an interesting part of the international sports legal framework; well-known to sports legal professionals but less familiar to the general public. This specialised branch of CAS operates during major sporting events, delivering rapid rulings on urgent disputes to ensure that competitions proceed smoothly. In this article, I’ll explore how the Ad Hoc Division functions, its impact on events like the recent controversy involving gymnast Jordan Chiles, and the challenges of appealing its decisions.
Background – Women’s Floor Final
On 5 August at the women’s floor final, Romania’s Sabrina Maneca-Voinea was given a score of 13.700 following her routine. Contributing to this score was a penalty of 0.1 points for stepping out of bounds; this later proved controversial as video footage appeared to show her narrowly staying within bounds at the relevant moment. Following that, Ana Bărbosu, also of Romania, scored 13.700, beat Maneca-Voinea by a tiebreaker and secured herself third place. Jordan Chiles initially scored 13.666, but a successful appeal to the judges to raise her difficulty score increased her point total to 13.766 enabling her to come third and win bronze at the award ceremony.
Subsequently, the Romanian Gymnastics Federation and the two Romanian athletes involved filed an application to the CAS Ad Hoc division disputing the day’s results, claiming that USA Gymnastics had filed their successful inquiry to increase Jordan Chiles’ score four seconds beyond the one-minute deadline to do so. On this basis, they argued that Jordan Chiles’ score should be readjusted to 13.666. CAS accepted this argument on 10 August and, as a result, Chiles’ score was adjusted down to 13.666 with Romania’s Ana Bărbosu then taking third place.
What Is The Court Of Arbitration For Sport?
Within sport, arbitration plays a significant role in the resolution of disputes. In layman’s terms, arbitration could be thought of as a “private court”. All members of a sports governing body (e.g. FIFA, the ITF, the ICC) collectively agree to abide by a set of rules and principles governing interaction between different parties. Within this broader agreement, the parties almost always agree to have disputes determined by way of arbitration. In these circumstances, arbitration is often preferred as a more discreet option to resolve disputes, but it also ensures that there is consistency of approach in resolving disputes in any one sport, or that occur across different jurisdictions. Within sports arbitration, CAS is the highest ruling tribunal and its role can be thought of as akin to a “supreme court” of sport, being recognised by all Olympic sports federations as well as the International Olympic Committee. Unlike the ‘supreme court’ there is an option to appeal CAS decisions to the Swiss Federal Supreme Court (often referred to as the Swiss Federal Tribunal or SFT) for a final determination.
What Is The Ad Hoc Division Of CAS?
Since 1996, CAS has maintained “Ad Hoc” panels of arbitrators to hastily resolve any disputes emerging at the Olympic Games (the Ad Hoc Division also convenes at other major sporting events). Recognising the need for efficiency in such cases, they aim to make decisions within 24 hours. Despite being physically based in host cities, these ad hoc bodies maintain their legal seat in Lausanne and remain bound to the same Swiss procedural law that governs CAS arbitrations.
It is notoriously difficult to bring a successful challenge to a field of play decision. Nevertheless, the outcome of a CAS Ad Hoc tribunal can have implications on the results of an event, as with the case of Jordan Chiles, Ana Maria Bărbosu and Sabrina Maneca-Voinea. While that CAS decision did not impose a performance judgment on any of the athletes involved, its ruling upon the legitimacy of one of the inquiries was consequential enough to provoke a medal revocation.
Appealing a CAS Ad Hoc Division decision?
On 12 August USA Gymnastics released a statement that they had submitted new “time-stamped, video evidence” showing an inquiry to the judge made within the 1-minute window i.e. within the permitted time. They argued that this evidence was not available before the tribunal decision and therefore could not have been considered. There is no procedural mechanism for the CAS to ‘reconsider’ an award in this way and CAS has confirmed that they are not reopening the case. USA Gymnastics is now faced with one option – an appeal to the SFT.
With its legal ‘seat’ in Switzerland, the appeal mechanism for a decision of the CAS (including the Ad Hoc Division) is to the SFT. Appeals of this nature are particularly difficult, with the Swiss Arbitration Association reporting that less than 10% of challenges to arbitral outcomes are successful. Throughout the entirety of CAS’s existence, only a handful of such appeals have succeeded, most due to procedural technicalities.
The grounds for appeal (which can only confirm or annul the award) are set out in the Swiss Federal Act on Private International Law (PILA) and comprise: (i) improper constitution of the arbitral tribunal; (ii) the arbitral tribunal improperly accepted or rejected jurisdiction; (iii) the arbitral tribunal ruled on matters beyond the claims submitted to it or failed to address one or more of those claims; (iv) the fundamental procedural rights of the parties were violated; or (v) the award is not compatible with public policy.
The SFT bases its decisions on the facts already established by the arbitral tribunal and generally does not correct or add to these findings, even if they appear inaccurate. This creates an additional challenge for USA Gymnastics. The SFT may exceptionally review factual findings in very rare circumstances:
- if new facts or evidence emerge from the decision itself; or
- if the facts were established in violation of fundamental procedural rules or procedural public policy, or if they result from an oversight that constitutes a formal denial of justice.
If they choose to appeal to the SFT, USA Gymnastics may argue that the speed at which an irrevocable CAS decision was made, which limited the availability of evidence, was in violation of their right to fair process under Swiss law. Nevertheless, they will be challenged by the fact that an explicit founding purpose of CAS ad hoc tribunals was to provide 24-hour resolutions to disputes at the Olympics and that in principle every National Olympic Committee has freely consented to recognise its authority.
Conclusion
In summary, the CAS ‘Ad Hoc’ division plays a crucial role in maintaining fairness during major sporting events by resolving disputes swiftly and efficiently. While its decisions, such as the recent ruling on Jordan Chiles’ medal, can be contentious, they are designed to ensure that competitions proceed without unnecessary delays. Taking decisions in such a short time frame, will always lead to questions about the fairness of the process, especially given the need for legal counsel to prepare evidence and submissions on the fly.
The avenue for appealing these decisions is narrow, underscoring the importance of the division’s role in delivering timely justice in the high-pressure environment of international sports.
If you require any advice on sporting regulation or disputes, please get in touch with Simon Grossobel, Litigation Partner and Head of the Quastels Sports Group.
Immigration Route for an International Sportsperson: A Case Study of a Football Manager’s Visa Requirements
In the globalised world of sports, the mobility of talent is crucial. Football managers, akin to players, often find themselves working across various countries. The immigration process for a football manager involves navigating a complex web of legal requirements. This article aims to elucidate the key steps and legal prerequisites involved in obtaining a visa for an international football manager, focusing on a recent case involving Liverpool FC‘s new appointment.
Case Study: Arne Slot’s Appointment at Liverpool FC
The football community was abuzz when Liverpool FC announced that Arne Slot, the former Feyenoord boss, would succeed Jurgen Klopp as their manager. Slot’s era at Anfield is set to begin on June 1, but his appointment is contingent upon receiving a work permit from the UK government. This situation provides a practical lens through which we can examine the visa process for football managers.
Visa Categories For Sports Professionals
For a football manager seeking to work in the UK, the most relevant visa category is the “T2 Sportsperson Visa,” which has been rebranded as the “International Sportsperson Visa.” This visa is designed for elite sports professionals, including managers and coaches, who are internationally recognised and whose employment will make a significant contribution to the development of their sport at the highest level in the UK.
Key Legal Requirements
- Sponsorship by a Recognised Body:
- Governing Body Endorsement: Slot must obtain an endorsement from The Football Association (The FA), which confirms his skills and reputation as an elite sportsperson and his anticipated contribution to football in the UK.
- Certificate of Sponsorship: Liverpool FC must issue a Certificate of Sponsorship (CoS). The club must be licensed by the Home Office to issue such certificates.
- Eligibility Criteria:
- Professional Standing: Slot needs to demonstrate significant achievements, such as his successful tenure with Feyenoord and his potential impact on football in the UK.
- English Language Proficiency: Slot must meet the English language requirement, typically by passing an approved English language test or holding an academic qualification taught in English.
- Maintenance Funds: Slot must show he has sufficient funds to support himself without relying on public funds, usually having at least £1,270 in his bank account for 28 days before the application.
- Application Process:
- Online Application: The application for the International Sportsperson Visa is submitted online, including the endorsement from The FA and the Certificate of Sponsorship from Liverpool FC.
- Biometric Information: Slot must provide biometric information (fingerprints and a photograph) at a visa application centre.
- Fees: The application fee and the Immigration Health Surcharge (IHS) must be paid. The IHS grants access to the UK’s National Health Service (NHS) during his stay.
- Validity and Extensions:
- Initial Period: The International Sportsperson Visa is typically granted for up to three years.
- Extensions: Extensions can be applied for if Slot continues to meet the eligibility requirements, including having a valid Certificate of Sponsorship.
- Path to Settlement:
- Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR): After five years in the UK on this visa, Slot may be eligible to apply for ILR, allowing him to live and work in the UK indefinitely. He must meet residency requirements and demonstrate continuous employment in his role.
How The Process Works For Arne Slot
For Slot to start working as Liverpool FC’s manager, the following steps are necessary:
- Obtaining Endorsement and Sponsorship: Slot needs an endorsement from The FA, confirming his eligibility. Liverpool FC must also secure a Certificate of Sponsorship.
- Application Timeline: Slot can apply for his visa up to three months before his start date on June 1. If he is inside the UK, a decision is typically made within three weeks; if outside, it may take up to eight weeks.
- Duration and Extension: The initial visa will last three years, with the option to extend, provided Slot’s employment conditions remain unchanged.
Likelihood of Approval
Given Liverpool FC’s announcement and the absence of any known issues in Slot’s past, it is highly likely that his visa application will be approved. The club’s confidence in announcing his appointment suggests they foresee no significant barriers in obtaining the necessary work permit.
Conclusion
The immigration route for a football manager like Arne Slot involves a meticulous process to ensure only the most qualified professionals are granted entry. By fulfilling legal requirements, such as obtaining endorsements, securing sponsorship, and meeting eligibility criteria, Slot can begin his tenure at Liverpool FC. Understanding these legal intricacies is essential for clubs and managers alike to navigate the process successfully. As international sports continue to evolve, staying informed about immigration policies will remain crucial for the seamless movement of sporting talent.
If you or your connections require legal advice, please contact Jayesh Jethwa or fill out our enquiry form below.