The Football Association (FA) has ended the captaincy rein of John Terry following the adjournment of his trial for alleged racist comments during Chelsea's league match with Queens Park Ranger's last year (a decision that has also resulted in the resignation of Fabio Capello). Many will argue that the FA was left with no choice. However, the matter once again poses the question as to whether or not governing bodies should stay their own internal processes in circumstances when there is a corresponding criminal investigation against the athlete under their jurisdiction.

Increasing numbers of sports clubs and bodies are using the expertise of third party specialists, be it for websites, apps, social networks or gaming platforms to interact with their fans domestically and internationally.  However, there appears to be a disconnect in terms of understanding the legal requirements and obligations the clubs are under when outsourcing (by way of a licence) or selling a database to a third party.  While data protection is not the most exciting topic to many it is particular important with the Information Commissioner Officer (“ICO”) having the power to levy significant fines of up to £500,000 for breaches of the Data Protection Act 1998 (“Act”). 

On 16 December 2011 the British Horseracing Authority (‘BHA’) Disciplinary Panel (the ‘Panel’) published its Reasons in arguably the biggest sport corruption case to be heard before a National Governing Body (‘NGB’) to date. The hearing lasted 11 days and involved charges against 13 named individuals. The outcome was:

- near lifetime bans from the sport for Maurice Sines and James Crickmore, the main protagonists in racing’s latest tale of premeditated corruption;
- lengthy (likely career ending bans) for jockeys Paul Doe and Greg Fairley; and
- significant bans also for Jimmy Quinn and Kirsty Milczarek. 

At the start of the 2010/11 Barclays Premier League season, a significant rule was introduced that could have important legal consequences within English football. The Premier League Handbook 2010/11 (Section L) introduced a rule which stated that each Premier League club must submit a Squad List of 25 players. Any players deemed surplus to requirements and who were omitted from the Squad List would not be able to play any Premier League games until at least the next transfer window. Some 18 months on, this article examines the effect of the rule and the legal consequences which may arise in the future.

LawinSport.com was established to provide you, the reader, with daily sports law information, articles of legal opinion and information about sports law books, events and courses.

LawinSport.com aims to be useful to you, so please let us know what you think. We want you to have your say and we would love to hear about what you miss in Lawinsport.com. Whatever it is please feel free to contact us to share your thoughts and we will do our best to grant your needs, because that is what LawinSport.com is about: satisfying your sports law needs.

Finally, if you work in the sector and would like to share you work with our readers we encourage you to contact us. We will be more than happy to publish your articles (as they will surely comply with our Terms and Conditions).

Thank you

This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.  
Editor
LawinSport.com