Daniel Meagher
Daniel Meagher is a senior associate in Winston & Strawn's International Arbitration and Commercial Litigation practices.
With an English law background primarily focused on international commercial arbitration, Daniel's work relates to projects, companies, governments, state entities, and individuals based in various regions worldwide, including Russia/CIS, MENA, Central and South Asia, and sub-Saharan Africa. He has represented clients in matters ranging from shareholder and joint venture disputes, through to delay and disruption claims in construction projects.
Daniel has represented and advised clients in a broad range of types of disputes procedures, including international arbitration (ICC, LCIA, HKIAC, SCC, AAA/ICDR, DIAC, LMAA, ICSID, UNCITRAL administered by PCA, and many other leading arbitral rules and institutions), English Court litigation (in particular, Commercial Court, Chancery, Court of Appeal), mediation, and expert determination.
Daniel also frequently advises as to other strategic aspects of multi-jurisdictional disputes where arbitration, litigation, and/or regulatory proceedings may be afoot in many jurisdictions worldwide. This can include, for example, applying for urgent injunctive relief (and responding to such applications) or pursuing enforcement of judgments and arbitral awards.
Practice Area
Panel
- Contributing Author
Education
- New York Law School, LLM, 2006
- University of Cambridge, MA, 2004
4 Contributions by Daniel Meagher
PRACTICE NOTES
Arbitration in sport: advantages and disadvantages, and when internal sports proceedings are arbitrations under the Arbitration Act 1996, with key case law and practitioner checkpoints
The purpose of this Practice Note
This Practice Note explores arbitration in the sphere of internal sporting proceedings and matters before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), concentrating on:
the benefits and drawbacks of arbitration in a sporting setting
the circumstances in which internal sports proceedings qualify as arbitrations
Arbitration is often promoted as superior to court litigation for its speed, cost-effectiveness and procedural adaptability. It is also, in general, a private process, meaning the substance and result of a case are kept confidential. These characteristics broadly hold true for sports disputes resolved by arbitration, though their application will ultimately turn on the particular context.
Sports-related arbitrations may involve, for example, internal proceedings of a sports federation or other regulatory authority, appeals from those outcomes to CAS tribunals, challenges to anti-doping rulings before CAS tribunals, appeals concerning selection and eligibility for the Olympic Games to CAS tribunals, or contractual disagreements heard by CAS or other tribunals. Each of these pathways is subject to its own procedural rules and protocols.
Timeliness is frequently paramount in sport, given the regular cadence of competitions and events. For instance, at the Olympic Games...
Arbitration
PRACTICE NOTES
CAS ad hoc Division: arbitration at the Olympic Games and major events—jurisdiction, seat, procedure, interim relief, awards, referral and appeals under the CAS ad hoc Rules
Purpose of the CAS ad hoc Division
This division was created to arbitrate disputes that emerge during major sporting events and that must be conclusively resolved within a 24-hour deadline. These cases are determined in line with the CAS Arbitration Rules applicable to the CAS ad hoc division for the Olympic Games (CAS ad hoc Rules).
Usage of the CAS ad hoc Rules
The CAS ad hoc Rules have been applied at the following events:
the Olympic Games, since 1996
the Commonwealth Games, since 1998
the UEFA European Championship, since 2000
the FIFA World Cup, in 2006, 2018, and 2022
the Asian Games, since 2014
the FIBA Basketball World Cup, in 2023
the UEFA WEURO, in 2025
the FIFA CWC, in 2025
The present CAS ad hoc Rules were established in 2003...
Arbitration
PRACTICE NOTES
Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS): 2020 Code (updated 2021) procedures, divisions, jurisdiction, interim relief, costs, hearings and awards; independence challenges and ECtHR-mandated public hearing reforms
The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS)
Founded in 1984, the CAS is an independent body dedicated to resolving disputes in the field of sport, and is the leading centralised international authority that appoints tribunals to render final decisions on certain types of sport disputes.
A wide spectrum of disputes is determined at the CAS, as reflected in its various divisions. Unless indicated otherwise, ‘CAS’ in this Practice Note is used in a broad sense to include any CAS division, the International Council of Arbitration for Sport (ICAS), and the CAS Court Office. In French, it is known as the Tribunal Arbitral du Sport (TAS).
Headquartered in Lausanne, Switzerland, the CAS also maintains representative administrative offices in Sydney, Australia and New York, USA. Generally, the CAS manages the earliest stages of an arbitration once proceedings have begun but before arbitrators are appointed; after appointment, the arbitrators direct the procedure.
Currently, the CAS comprises four divisions, each operating under its own procedural rules...
Arbitration
PRACTICE NOTES
Sports arbitration and dispute resolution: structures, procedures, and key fora (CAS, WADA, FIFA, NBA/FIBA, FIA, and ad hoc event tribunals)
Arbitration and dispute resolution in sport are frequently dictated by the bespoke rules of the pertinent federation or association. Accordingly, this Practice Note begins with a summary of how sports regulation and governance are structured, before moving to a high-level outline of sports arbitration procedures.
Structural organisation of sport regulation and governance
Sport is commonly overseen and regulated by associations and federations. Every such body maintains governance frameworks and detailed rules by which they are organised, and these will very often set out provisions and mechanisms for the resolution of disputes that arise within the sport. Some disciplines fall within the Olympic Games and the wider Olympic Movement. The Olympic Movement denotes ‘all organisations, athletes and other persons who agree to be guided by the Olympic Charter’ (Olympic Charter, 2015, Rule 1.1). The International Olympic Committee (IOC) supervises the Olympic Movement and, in general, serves as the supreme authority for all persons and entities within it. Among other requirements, adherence to the World Anti-Doping Agency Code (the WADA Code) is a condition of membership of the Olympic Movement...
Arbitration
If you expected to see yourself on this page, click here.
