The Concept of Lex Sportive

The term lex sportive when translated into English means sports law. This meaning
suggests that lex sportive represents an autonomous branch of law that is similar to company
or environmental laws. To be considered an independent branch of law or a separate corpus
of law, lex sportive needs to have an underlying theory that brings together different strands
of sporting disputes. However, this has not been the case with regard to lex sportive. Contrary
to the meaning that its name conveys, I do not believe that lex sportive is the sports law or
that it is an independent field of law.

For an area of law to become a distinct legal entity, it needs to meet the requirements
of certain key elements. The elements include specificity of the subject matter, legal
standards, and considerable depth of jurisprudence. On specificity, a distinct branch of law
should deal with a specific subject matter (Diaconu, 2018). Since lex sportive deals with
sporting disputes requiring arbitration, it can be considered to be an area of law with specific
subject matter. This is, however, the only major element for being an independent law branch
whose requirements lex sportive meets.

As for legal standards and depth of jurisprudence, it is clear that lex sportive does not
meet the requirements of these elements. Regarding legal standards, lex sportive in general
comprises of jurisprudence of Court of Arbitration of Sports (CAS) that has been developed
over the years and the rules that have been established by various sports governing bodies
(SGBs) (de Oliveira, 2017). It is important to note that even though the decisions of CAS are
sometimes used as precedents, they are usually only binding on a given case’s immediate
parties. Thus, there is no clear standard that practitioners of sports law can use to resolve
intricate sporting issues. For an area of law to be an independent branch of law, it needs to

3
have a large body of specialized knowledge that a practitioner can dedicate to study its
peculiarities and nuances. The lack of clear legal standards makes it hard for lex sportive to
develop such specialized knowledge.

Another problem with lex sportive is that it is a product of relatively small arbitral
decisions that fall within a limited range. Additionally, the arbitral decisions lex sportive
cover a relatively short period of time as CAS has been in existence for less than four
decades. Due to the short period of its existence and the limited number of arbitral decisions
made, lex sportive is yet to develop a significant body of rulings or coherent theory that binds
its various strands together. Additionally, the fact that lex sportive has been developed almost
entirely by CAS, a private entity, significantly reduces its legitimacy. According to Wolf
(2017), the regulatory authority often exercised by non-state entities such as CAS lacks the
legitimacy exercised by state actors.

Given these facts, I do not think that it is appropriate to define lex sportive as the
sports law. There are many important elements of an independent branch of law that lex
sportive lacks. The appropriate definition of lex sportive would be an area of law or body of
case law that has been developed by the Court of Arbitration of Sports which comprises of
jurisprudence of CAS and the rules and regulations that have been established by the various
sports governing bodies (SGBs).

4

References

de Oliveira, L. V. (2017). Lex sportiva as the contractual governing law. The International
Sports Law Journal, 17(1-2), 101-116.

Diaconu, C. M. (2018). A plea for the agrarian law as a distinct and autonomous branch of
law. Lucrari Stiintifice, Universitatea de Stiinte Agricole Si Medicina Veterinara” Ion
Ionescu de la Brad” Iasi, Seria Agronomie, 61(2), 325-327.

Wolf, K. D. (2017). Patterns of legitimation in hybrid transnational regimes: The controversy
surrounding the lex sportiva. Politics and Governance, 5(1), 63-74.