When the Court of Arbitration for Sport, also known by its French acronym TAS, authorised South African athlete Oscar Pistorius to compete at the London 2012 Olympic Games, following a review of whether his prostheses granted him an unfair advantage, the ruling did more than alter a sporting calendar: it changed the way millions of people understood the concept of competitive equality.

That case is just one of many that illustrate the real impact of this tribunal, which, without cameras or stadiums, determines the fate of careers, regulations, events and reputations. And from 1 July 2025, this same court will operate under a revised version of its Code of Arbitration, a foundational document that regulates its functioning and now brings in reforms aimed at streamlining processes, enhancing transparency and strengthening the legitimacy of each decision.

To outside observers, these changes may appear technical or remote. Though a quick glance at some high-profile names helps to grasp their significance. It was at CAS where Indian sprinter Dutee Chand managed to suspend the hyperandrogegism rules that had excluded her from the track; where Michel Platini appealed, and had reduced, a sanction for misconduct as a football official; and where FIFA, the International Olympic Committee, World Anti-Doping Agency and dozens of federations bring their most sensitive disputes. Nothing that happens in Lausanne is insignificant. Every decision made there resonates throughout the world of sport, impacting both what we watch and those who live it.

In parallel, Article R54 will redefine the criteria for appointing arbitrators. Once the new code enters into force, the division president will be required to expressly consider experience, diversity and rotation when confirming panellists. Furthermore, in sports that maintain specialist lists, these must be given priority unless a duly reasoned justification is provided.

This point takes on particular relevance in light of the case involving South African runner Caster Semenya, whose dispute over testosterone levels and the right to compete not only sparked global debate but also exposed tensions between regulations, identity and biology. In that context, panel composition will no longer be a minor technical matter, and from July, the new code will reinforce its importance by enshrining these criteria within the normative framework of sports arbitration.

The new code will also introduce an expedited procedure, formalised under Article R44.4. If both parties agree, the arbitral panel may set shorter deadlines and act more swiftly. This mechanism could prove decisive in tournaments with imminent fixtures or in cases like that of Manchester City, which appealed to CAS against a sanction excluding the club from European competitions. In that instance, regardless of the verdict itself, it was the timely response that kept the competition alive. In arbitration, as in all forms of justice, being on time is as crucial as being right: a delayed award can render any remedy meaningless and, in some cases, cause irreparable harm.

In the same vein of reinforcing speed as a structural guarantee, and without requiring agreement between parties, Article R46 will for the first time impose formal maximum timeframes for delivering awards: three months from the receipt of the file, with a possible one-month extension. If the deadline is not met, the panel may be removed and its fees reduced. This concrete measure will turn the demand for efficiency into written law. Like any other form of justice, sports justice cannot afford to arrive late.

Financial transparency will also advance. Article R64.4 will oblige CAS to provide a breakdown of all arbitration-related expenses – fees, travel, expert assessments, administrative costs, witnesses and interpreters – and to notify the parties within a reasonable timeframe. This will represent progress in terms of financial predictability, especially valued by athletes and organisations with limited resources.

The final key change allows the publication of arbitral awards, unless covered by confidentiality agreements. This means CAS will not only act but also be visible, understood, and open to scrutiny. In a time when legitimacy matters as much as rules, this step signals institutional modernisation and meets the expectations of a more informed and demanding audience seeking transparency in decisions that affect sport’s economy, values, identity, and emotions. Every ruling not only settles disputes but also leaves a lasting impact on the shared history of millions.

The new code won’t rewrite each case’s story but will learn from them to create clearer rules for the future. Today, arbitrating in sport means addressing current challenges, urgent issues, and evolving sensitivities. This important, often quiet work begins early, starting with how regulations are drafted, because that’s where the real game begins.

___________________________________________________________________