The resolution of professional tennis disputes

<p dir="ltr">The regulatory landscape of professional tennis is scattered across several entities, each administering its own tournaments. This article focuses on disputes involving professional tennis players. In this context, it identifies two major areas of disputes, namely regula...

وصف كامل

محفوظ في:
التفاصيل البيبلوغرافية
المؤلف الرئيسي: Ilias Bantekas (7628027) (author)
منشور في: 2023
الموضوعات:
الوسوم: إضافة وسم
لا توجد وسوم, كن أول من يضع وسما على هذه التسجيلة!
_version_ 1864513509291720704
author Ilias Bantekas (7628027)
author_facet Ilias Bantekas (7628027)
author_role author
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Ilias Bantekas (7628027)
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2023-05-31T09:00:00Z
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv 10.1093/jnlids/idad010
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://figshare.com/articles/journal_contribution/The_resolution_of_professional_tennis_disputes/26508349
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv CC BY 4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Health sciences
Sports science and exercise
Law and legal studies
Law in context
Professional Tennis
Dispute Resolution
Regulatory Disputes
Contractual Disputes
Disciplinary Offences
Doping
Corruption Offences
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv The resolution of professional tennis disputes
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv Text
Journal contribution
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
text
contribution to journal
description <p dir="ltr">The regulatory landscape of professional tennis is scattered across several entities, each administering its own tournaments. This article focuses on disputes involving professional tennis players. In this context, it identifies two major areas of disputes, namely regulatory (encompassing disciplinary, doping and corruption offences) and contractual. The latter are chiefly resolved through litigation. Regulatory disputes are administered through distinct judicial and quasi-judicial institutions set up by the various tennis entities. The International Tennis Federation’s (ITF) international adjudication panel and its independent tribunal are the key institutions in this respect, with the independent tribunal possessing all the attributes of arbitral tribunals. The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) has been conferred a limited appellate jurisdiction over decisions of these two entities. Overall, the ITF’s dispute resolution architecture has been effective and has created a significant body of precedent, further supplemented by that of the CAS.</p><h2>Other Information</h2><p dir="ltr">Published in: Journal of International Dispute Settlement<br>License: <a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" target="_blank">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</a><br>See article on publisher's website: <a href="https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jnlids/idad010" target="_blank">https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jnlids/idad010</a></p>
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
id Manara2_41f7c59d2e3fbc0a79441bf3f7022215
identifier_str_mv 10.1093/jnlids/idad010
network_acronym_str Manara2
network_name_str Manara2
oai_identifier_str oai:figshare.com:article/26508349
publishDate 2023
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
repository.name.fl_str_mv
repository_id_str
rights_invalid_str_mv CC BY 4.0
spelling The resolution of professional tennis disputesIlias Bantekas (7628027)Health sciencesSports science and exerciseLaw and legal studiesLaw in contextProfessional TennisDispute ResolutionRegulatory DisputesContractual DisputesDisciplinary OffencesDopingCorruption Offences<p dir="ltr">The regulatory landscape of professional tennis is scattered across several entities, each administering its own tournaments. This article focuses on disputes involving professional tennis players. In this context, it identifies two major areas of disputes, namely regulatory (encompassing disciplinary, doping and corruption offences) and contractual. The latter are chiefly resolved through litigation. Regulatory disputes are administered through distinct judicial and quasi-judicial institutions set up by the various tennis entities. The International Tennis Federation’s (ITF) international adjudication panel and its independent tribunal are the key institutions in this respect, with the independent tribunal possessing all the attributes of arbitral tribunals. The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) has been conferred a limited appellate jurisdiction over decisions of these two entities. Overall, the ITF’s dispute resolution architecture has been effective and has created a significant body of precedent, further supplemented by that of the CAS.</p><h2>Other Information</h2><p dir="ltr">Published in: Journal of International Dispute Settlement<br>License: <a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" target="_blank">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</a><br>See article on publisher's website: <a href="https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jnlids/idad010" target="_blank">https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jnlids/idad010</a></p>2023-05-31T09:00:00ZTextJournal contributioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontextcontribution to journal10.1093/jnlids/idad010https://figshare.com/articles/journal_contribution/The_resolution_of_professional_tennis_disputes/26508349CC BY 4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessoai:figshare.com:article/265083492023-05-31T09:00:00Z
spellingShingle The resolution of professional tennis disputes
Ilias Bantekas (7628027)
Health sciences
Sports science and exercise
Law and legal studies
Law in context
Professional Tennis
Dispute Resolution
Regulatory Disputes
Contractual Disputes
Disciplinary Offences
Doping
Corruption Offences
status_str publishedVersion
title The resolution of professional tennis disputes
title_full The resolution of professional tennis disputes
title_fullStr The resolution of professional tennis disputes
title_full_unstemmed The resolution of professional tennis disputes
title_short The resolution of professional tennis disputes
title_sort The resolution of professional tennis disputes
topic Health sciences
Sports science and exercise
Law and legal studies
Law in context
Professional Tennis
Dispute Resolution
Regulatory Disputes
Contractual Disputes
Disciplinary Offences
Doping
Corruption Offences