Should we be comfortably satisfied with the standard of proof for match-fixing?
Published 08 October 2013 By: Kevin Carpenter
In this blog I have previously discussed the sanctions for match-fixing offences. I now intend to put the horse back before the cart and briefly examine another aspect of match-fixing cases, the standard of proof.
Get access to this article and all of the expert analysis and commentary at LawInSport
Already a member?
Articles, webinars, conference videos and podcast transcripts
This work was written for and first published on LawInSport.com (unless otherwise stated) and the copyright is owned by LawInSport Ltd. Permission is granted to make digital or hard copies of this work (or part, or abstracts, of it) for personal use provided copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage, and provided that all copies bear this notice and full citation on the first page (which should include the URL, company name (LawInSport), article title, author name, date of the publication and date of use) of any copies made. Copyright for components of this work owned by parties other than LawInSport must be honoured.
- Tags: Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) | cricket | match-fixing | snooker | UEFA | United Kingdom (UK)
- Match fixing in Bangladesh: the ICC’s biggest investigation yet
- Realities of football match-fixing – case Finland
- BASL September update: sporting integrity revisited
- Hill Dickinson gives expert advice on match-fixing at Scottish PFA’s National Conference
Kevin is a advisor and member of the editorial board for LawInSport, having previously acted as editor. In his day-to-day work he has two roles: as the Principal for his own consultancy business Captivate Legal & Sports Solutions, and Special Counsel for Sports Integrity at leading global sports technology and data company Genius Sports.