By Elizabeth Palumbo, a third-year law student at Marquette University Law School
(Editor’s note: This article constitutes a summary of the CAS Milestones lecture held at Marquette University Law School on October 17, 2025, by Matthieu Reeb, the CAS Director General, as part of the National Sports Law Institute Fall Conference Resolving International Sports Disputes & Analyzing Collegiate Athletics Post House.)
When disputes arise on or off the field, most fans never see the courtroom drama that follows. Behind headlines about doping scandals, eligibility appeals, and financial sanctions is one institution: The Court of Arbitration for Sport (“CAS”). Based in Lausanne, Switzerland, and founded in 1984, CAS has become the top judicial authority in international sport – balancing speed, expertise, and fairness in resolving disputes that impact careers, competitions, and even nations.
Why a Court of Sport?
The concept of a specialized court for sports originated in an unexpected way during the 1980s. A sports dispute between China and Taiwan was brought before a civil court in Lausanne, which many believed was not the right place for an international sports case. This experience led to the idea of establishing a global sports tribunal, as it became clear that traditional courts were not well-equipped to deal with the complex legal, contractual, and regulatory issues involved in sports. CAS was established in 1984 as a “supreme court of sport” to resolve these unique conflicts efficiently and cost-effectively, with panels of arbitrators knowledgeable in both law and athletics.
Sports arbitration is unique compared to other forms of arbitration. CAS manages everything from contractual disputes between athletes and federations to disciplinary appeals. Its main advantages—speed, low costs, and the parties’ ability to select arbitrators—make it the ideal forum for disputes that can’t wait for years of litigation.
Building Independence – The Birth of ICAS
In its early years, CAS operated under the IOC’s umbrella and received financial support from the IOC. However, this structure raised questions about independence. What if the IOC itself were involved in a dispute? Following advice from the Swiss Federal Tribunal, the International Council of Arbitration for Sport (“ICAS”), a new supervisory body designed to protect CAS’s autonomy, was established in 1994.
ICAS’s mission is clear but essential: to protect CAS’s integrity. It guarantees the arbitral system is adequately funded, that its procedures are fair, and that arbitrators are properly appointed. Within ICAS, specialized commissions manage key issues: challenges to arbitrators’ independence, applications for legal aid, and membership appointments. This structure has helped establish CAS’s credibility throughout the sporting world. Today, its jurisdiction is recognized by all Olympic International Federations, the World Anti-Doping Agency, and major professional sports organizations like the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (“FIFA”).
How CAS Works
CAS is a permanent tribunal located in Lausanne’s Palais de Beaulieu, but its influence extends worldwide. Nearly 500 arbitrators from 90 countries are listed, illustrating a balance of legal expertise, geographical diversity, and gender representation. Athletes or federations appoint arbitrators solely from this list, ensuring consistency and continuity in CAS jurisprudence – part of the evolving body of case law known as lex sportiva.
CAS proceedings are known for their efficiency. Cases are decided by panels of one to three arbitrators, with hearings usually held in private. However, public hearings can be requested and are often streamed online for transparency. Arbitrators prefer that parties appear in person, although witnesses and experts often join virtually—a practice that increased after the Coronavirus pandemic in 2020.
Access to justice is also a key feature. Through ICAS’s legal aid program, athletes with limited financial resources can receive full or partial support for arbitration fees, travel, and lodging. This guarantees that the right to sports justice does not rely on personal wealth or federation backing.
Major Cases and Milestones
Over more than four decades, CAS has heard some of the most important cases in modern sports. One of its most high-profile cases happened after the 2014 Sochi Olympic Games. CAS handled dozens of appeals involving Russian athletes accused of benefiting from a state-sponsored doping program. Although evidence like the “Rodchenkov notebook” raised serious concerns, CAS panels emphasized that sanctions must be based on strong, individualized proof, which led some athletes to be cleared and others to be disqualified from future competitions.
After FIFA recognized CAS jurisdiction, the court became central to regulating football’s economics. The Financial Fair Play rules, which limit clubs’ spending to no more than 70% of the club’s income, have prompted numerous CAS appeals, with sanctions including fines and exclusion from the Champions League. CAS decisions in these cases have reinforced accountability and consistency across European football, prompting some discussions about implementing a salary cap in the league.
CAS has also faced tough questions about biological differences and fairness. Some female athletes who transition and have naturally high testosterone levels have been required to take medication to compete, sparking debate over discrimination versus fairness in competition. CAS rulings have influenced international federation policies in this sensitive area.
These cases all occurred outside major competitions, leading to a new need for an ad hoc CAS division—temporary tribunals activated only during significant events. These panels make decisions within hours or days, ensuring competitions continue without delay. At the Paris 2024 Olympic Games, CAS managed 21 urgent procedures on-site through this system, which was first used at the Rio 2016 Olympics.
New Frontiers
As global sports evolve, so do the disputes brought to CAS. Issues like match-fixing and illegal betting are increasing, especially in tennis and football, where athletes may even face pressure from criminal groups. These cases are usually complex, with evidence often difficult to gather.
CAS has also emphasized harmonization, ensuring that similar reasoning is applied to comparable cases, regardless of the sport or nationality involved. Consistency is, after all, essential to maintaining the credibility of lex sportiva. Transparency remains an ongoing discussion. Public hearings and online access are seen to increase trust, but not all parties are comfortable with publicity. In practice, most hearings stay private, though CAS occasionally livestreams sessions—including, notably, one case broadcast live on Chinese television.
The Future of Sports Justice
From its modest beginnings in 1984 to nearly 1,000 cases annually today, CAS has become vital to the governance of global sports. It provides a rare forum where athletes, federations, and institutions can meet on equal ground before neutral experts. Looking ahead, the challenges remain: ensuring accessibility, strengthening independence, and maintaining harmony among diverse legal systems. Yet, the mission to deliver fair, efficient, and consistent justice in sports remains unchanged. In an era where a single decision can reshape careers or harm nations, the Court of Arbitration for Sport acts both as a referee and protector—ensuring that in the world’s biggest competitions, the rules are not only followed but also upheld.
