The 14th Update | March'26
March 2026
Welcome back to the 14th Update, a Newsletter curated by 14 Sports Law, where the world of sports law unfolds with the rhythm of a well-struck penalty kick.
We’re pleased to bring you the February edition of the 14th Update, featuring a curated selection of significant developments from across the global sports landscape. This edition places particular emphasis on key case-law updates alongside important regulatory developments.
Our mission remains unwavering: to decode the complexities of sports law and present them to you in an engaging format. 14th Update is your passport to the latest developments in the arena of sports law, business, and technology.
As always, we invite you to share your thoughts, feedback, and questions with us at [info@14sportslaw.com].
We wish you a very happy and successful New Year, and as always- happy reading!
Best,
Luis Cassiano Neves
Founding Partner, 14 Sports Law
14 Sports Law was honoured as “Sports Law Firm of the Year” at the 7th Edition of the Iberian Lawyer Awards, with Matilde Costa Dias present in Madrid to receive the award.
Luis Cassiano Neves and Matilde Costa Dias were in Budapest on 19-20 February, to attend the FIFA Football Law Annual Review.
Matilde Costa Dias will once again serve as an Arbitrator at the 5th Edition of the Sports Arbitration Moot 2026.
Aakash Batra ran a webinar hosted by “The Legal Voice” on the topic “How to Crack the FIFA Agent Exam 2026”, engaging with participants in an interactive session focused on exam strategy.
14 Knowledge Lab’s FIFA Agent Exam Prep Course 2026 has officially commenced, with the first class held on 28 February and weekly sessions scheduled thereafter. Enrolment remains open, with recorded lectures available for participants joining mid-cycle.
Luis Cassiano Neves & Aakash Batra will be presenting a research paper on the topic “Reimagining Olympic Hosting in the Global South – India’s 2036 Bid and the Search for a Legally Viable Model” at the 2nd GCSEL International Conference on Sports Law in the Global South, scheduled for 14 March at Gujarat National Law University, Gandhinagar, India.
Human Rights v. Olympic Neutrality: The Heraskevych Case
The disqualification of Ukrainian skeleton athlete Vladyslav Heraskevych at the Milano-Cortina 2026 Winter Olympics crystallises a profound legal and ethical conflict at the heart of the Olympic movement. Heraskevych was barred from competition after insisting on wearing a “Helmet of Remembrance” bearing images of Ukrainian athletes who lost their lives in the war. The International Olympic Committee (‘IOC’) and International Bobsleigh & Skeleton Federation invoked the Olympic Charter’s athlete expression rules to justify the ban, a position subsequently upheld by the CAS Ad Hoc Division.
Yet, the regulatory basis for this outcome remains opaque. The Olympic Charter simultaneously enshrines respect for human rights, including freedom of expression under Principle 1 and Rule 40.2, and bans political, religious or racial demonstrations under Rule 50.2, without clarifying how these provisions interact or whether there is any hierarchy of application. Critics argue that the IOC’s Guidelines effectively impose a total ban on expression during competition, a position that appears difficult to reconcile with the Charter’s human rights commitments and the IOC’s own inconsistent practice in past Games.
From a human rights perspective, any restriction on expression, particularly one that operates without a clear legal definition of “expression”, should satisfy rigorous tests of necessity and proportionality. Under Article 10 ECHR (applicable in Swiss and European human rights analysis), limitations on freedom of expression must pursue legitimate aims such as public safety or the protection of others’ rights, and must be proportionate to those aims. It is difficult to demonstrate that preserving an abstract notion of neutrality, at the cost of silencing memorialisation of deceased athletes, meets these criteria. The Swiss Federal Supreme Court may soon have to examine whether the IOC’s rules on athlete expression are compatible with the fundamental rights commitments set out in the Olympic Charter. If the issue remains unsettled, the matter could ultimately reach the European Court of Human Rights.
CAS Upholds UEFA’s MCO Ruling in FK DAC Conference League Exclusion
The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) has dismissed the appeal of Slovakian club FK DAC 1904 A.S. against UEFA’s decision to exclude it from the 2025/26 UEFA Conference League for failing to comply with the Multi-Club Ownership (MCO) Rules. The club had challenged its disqualification on procedural grounds, notably UEFA’s advancement of the compliance assessment date to 1 March 2025, and contested the interpretation of overlap in governance structures.
CAS confirmed that UEFA’s change to the assessment date was procedurally valid and that the involvement of a single individual in senior roles across both FK DAC and Hungarian club Győri ETO FC sufficed to breach Article 5.01 of the UEFA Club Competition Regulations. The ruling reinforces that actual day-to-day influence need not be proven; the mere possibility of “decisive influence” (broadly interpreted) is sufficient to trigger regulatory incompatibility, and upholds UEFA’s autonomy under Swiss law to set and enforce eligibility criteria for its competitions.
Latest Edition of FIFA’s Guide to Submitting a Minor Application
On 19 February 2026, FIFA published a revised edition of its Guide to Submitting a Minor Application, reflecting recent regulatory developments and the increasing factual and legal complexity surrounding international transfers of minors.
While the framework remains unchanged, international transfers of players under 18 remain prohibited save for six narrowly defined exceptions requiring prior FIFA approval. The updated Guide consolidates procedural requirements and applicable documentary standards. It provides an overview of application pathways, detailed breakdowns of each exception and corresponding documentation, expanded case-based FAQs, and references to relevant FIFA circulars and CAS jurisprudence.
WADA Releases Final Text of the 2027 World Anti-Doping Code
World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) has published the final English and French versions of the 2027 World Anti-Doping Code, which will enter into force on 1 January 2027. The text follows its formal approval by WADA’s Foundation Board in December 2025 at the World Conference on Doping in Sport in Busan, Republic of Korea.
The 2027 Code introduces a tiered sanctioning model for non-Specified Substances, adopts a more rehabilitation-focused approach for Substances of Abuse. It also expands mitigation pathways, including a broader “Contaminated Source” concept, structured retroactive TUE relief, enhanced Substantial Assistance provisions, and incentives for early admission.
The new Code strengthens governance and athlete safeguards through the introduction of an Independent Review Expert, harmonised appeal timelines, clearer NADO operational independence, and reinforced protections relating to minors, data privacy, and human rights.
FIFA’s 2025 CAS Report: Numbers Behind Football Cases
On 17 February 2026, FIFA published the fourth edition of its CAS & Football Annual Report, covering the 2025 calendar year. The figures confirm that football remains the dominant sport before the CAS, accounting for 779 of 1,005 registered cases (77.5%). CAS notified FIFA of 346 appeals against its decisions in 2025, with FIFA participating as a party in 150 proceedings.
Of the 73 awards on the merits issued in cases involving FIFA, 81% upheld FIFA’s decision (fully or partially), while 11% annulled or referred decisions back and 8% were declared inadmissible. The average duration of proceedings stood at 419 days, with employment disputes continuing to form the bulk of football-related appeals.
Disclaimer: This Newsletter is the intellectual property of 14 Sports Law. Readers are strictly advised not to take any action based solely upon the information and analysis provided herein without seeking professional advice. The authors as well as 14 Sports Law explicitly disclaim any and all liability to anyone who has read this Newsletter, or otherwise, in respect of anything, and of consequences of anything done, or omitted to be done by any such person in reliance upon the contents herein. It is imperative that readers exercise caution and seek legal counsel before relying on the information presented in the Newsletter.