header-logo header-logo

Power imbalance exposed?

227487
The case of Caster Semenya highlights the disadvantages faced by athletes under mandatory sports arbitration systems: Dr Estelle Ivanova sets out the need for greater oversight
  • The European Court of Human Rights found that Switzerland did not properly scrutinise the sports arbitration ruling against Caster Semenya, violating her right to a fair hearing.
  • The judgment highlights how athletes face structural disadvantages in mandatory arbitration systems dominated by sports governing bodies.
  • Switzerland and other jurisdictions may need to strengthen judicial oversight of sports arbitration to protect fundamental rights and maintain trust in global sport.

The Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) delivered its judgment in the long-running case of the South African two-time 800-metre Olympic champion Caster Semenya on 10 July 2025 (Semenya v Switzerland, Application No 10934/21). She challenged the legality of World Athletics Regulations requiring female athletes with differences of sex development (DSD) to reduce their natural testosterone levels in order to compete in certain events.

Her

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
An indemnity costs battle with a £20m gap could reopen an important question: what weight should an approved budget carry?
back-to-top-scroll