Winston & Strawn
3 Experts
2 Contributions by Winston & Strawn
PRACTICE NOTES
ARCHIVED –
This archived practice note sets out information on the criminal cartel offence as it stood before the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2014 came into force on 1 April 2014. It is no longer updated.
The offence criminalises individuals who take part in cartel conduct in the UK. Previously, liability depended on the person having dishonestly entered into any of the following arrangements:
fixing prices
limiting output
dividing markets or customers
rigging bids
The activity must relate to products or services in the UK and involve individuals at competing firms.
The offence can be made out even where the scheme is never put into effect or is unsuccessful. The issue is whether the individual agreed to engage in cartel behaviour (for example, to fix prices) and did so dishonestly; no competition law assessment is required.
A person
Competition
CHECKLISTS
ARCHIVED: This Checklist is archived and no longer maintained.
CORONAVIRUS (COVID-19)
Numerous arbitral organisations have addressed the coronavirus pandemic by issuing practical guidance and adjusting standard procedures and ways of working.
To understand how this content and related arbitration proceedings might be affected, see Practice Note: Arbitral organisations and coronavirus (COVID-19)—practical impact [Archived] [Archived]. For further information, see: Coronavirus (COVID-19) and arbitration—overview.
HKIAC’s Administered Arbitration Rules are widely adopted institutional rules, administered by HKIAC in Hong Kong, and applied globally. This Checklist outlines the arbitration process under the 2013 HKIAC Rules. For guidance on the 2018 HKIAC Rules, refer to the ‘Related documents’.
Preliminary steps
Determine the available claims and any counterclaims.
Assess the scope of the arbitration clause and whether those claims and counterclaims can be resolved by arbitration.
Select your preferred arbitrator, either for sole appointment or as your party nominee on a three-member
Arbitration
4 Contributions by Winston & Strawn Experts
PRACTICE NOTES
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
Arbitration
PRACTICE NOTES
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
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
Arbitration
PRACTICE NOTES
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
Arbitration
If you expected to see yourself on this page, click here.
