1. What is the current legal landscape for Sports Law in your jurisdiction?

Croatia’s sports ecosystem is built around the Sports Act (Zakon o sportu), which frames sport as an activity of special public interest. The Act guarantees equal access to sport without discrimination and regulates the system end-to-end: activities, participants, financing, oversight, and integrity.

Under this framework, “sports activities” are broadly defined to include competition, training and coaching, health-oriented exercise, the organization and management of events, and intermediation in sport. Sports and athletes are categorized by mass participation, international status, and results—decisions made by the Croatian Olympic Committee (HOO), the Croatian Paralympic Committee, and the Croatian Sports Association of the Deaf. National federations carry public powers: they run competition systems, license technical staff, register athletes, enforce discipline, and issue binding rules within their sport.

Funding is shared between the state and local self-government through the “public needs in sport” budgets. Dedicated programs support elite sport, school and university sport, and parasport, alongside investment in facilities, event organization, athlete welfare, scholarships, and measures to safeguard integrity.

Athletes—professional and amateur—may be engaged as employees or under sport-specific contracts. Croatian labour law applies in tandem with special sports rules. Elite medal-winners, head coaches/selectors, and coaches who achieve podium results at major events may be entitled to a permanent monthly stipend as a form of state recognition. Discipline and integrity protection are primarily enforced at federation level, with backing from national bodies.

Croatia applies the WADA Code. Anti-doping education and athlete health protection are mandatory components of the system, and the national anti-doping authority operates within the public health framework. Event organizers must ensure proper doping control conditions.

Disputes in sport are resolved by arbitration, mediation, or the courts, often before specialized sports arbitration bodies where available. Croatian rules are aligned with international standards set by global and European federations (e.g., FIFA/UEFA) and WADA, especially on player transfers, anti-doping, and the organization of professional competitions.

A notable adjacent area is sports betting. A new Gambling Act scheduled to enter into force in 2026 tightens controls: centralized player identification, advertising restrictions, sponsorship limits, and enhanced protections for minors are all part of the package.

Commercially, athlete names, signs, and brands are protected through trademark and related intellectual property laws. Special regimes apply to transfers of minors and to foreign athletes, who must comply with Croatian immigration and work-permit requirements. All athletes remain subject to both domestic and international anti-doping oversight.

2. What three essential pieces of advice would you give to clients involved in Sports Law matters?

(1) Pick governing law, forum (court or arbitration), and language. Build clear notice-and-cure steps for late pay or other breaches, allow service by email to named addresses, and set consequences (interest, suspension, termination). Fold in the applicable federation rulebook by reference. Cover IP/image rights, data protection, morals/integrity clauses, minors/safeguarding, and force majeure. Make sure the right people sign—and keep one clean, final version.

(2) License and register everyone who needs it (athletes, coaches, intermediaries). Track eligibility, transfer windows, immigration/work permits for foreigners, anti-doping education/testing, and betting/match-fixing bans. Keep a one-page compliance calendar (renewals, medicals, filings) and short, readable policies your staff follow.

(3) Maintain a tidy file – signed contracts/amendments, payroll proofs, medical and performance records, selection/disciplinary decisions, and key emails/messages. Send formal default notices on time, diarize deadlines (internal appeals, limitation periods), and try a short without-prejudice settlement first. If you must litigate, you’ll already have a ready bundle—and you’ll save time, cost, and credibility.

3. What are the greatest threats and opportunities in Sports Law in the next 12 months?

The biggest near-term risk in sports law isn’t a new regulation; it’s a wobble in the machinery that decides disputes. On 10 July 2025 the European Court of Human Rights, sitting as a Grand Chamber, held that Switzerland violated the right to a fair hearing when its Supreme Court reviewed Caster Semenya’s appeal from a CAS award too narrowly. In plain terms: when fundamental rights are on the line, Swiss courts must look harder at CAS outcomes. The ruling doesn’t strike down World Athletics’ rules or rewrite CAS overnight, but it does put the Swiss judicial “safety net” on notice.

That single shift carries real-world consequences over the next year. Parties who lose at CAS will test more human-rights arguments in Switzerland; judges will be feeling their way toward what a “particularly rigorous” review looks like in sport. Expect some cases to take longer to become truly final and a patch of unpredictability while standards of review settle, especially in eligibility, disciplinary and selection disputes where proportionality and less-restrictive alternatives matter.

CAS itself remains the apex forum, but panels will now need to write awards that are more obviously “rights-proofed”: clearer reasoning on medical necessity and proportionality, a visible weighing of alternatives, and procedural safeguards that show equality of arms. The better that reasoning, the more likely the award is to survive beefed-up Swiss scrutiny.

For regulators, the message is similar. World Athletics’ position is unchanged for now, but the judicial climate around sex-eligibility/DSD (and other integrity policies) has shifted. Rules that affect core rights will face closer interrogation in court even if CAS upholds them at first instance so federations should expect to defend not just the aim of a rule, but its necessity and fit.

All of this cuts two ways. In the short run, legal certainty takes a hit: organisers may need contingency language in contracts; sponsors will ask what happens if eligibility flips late; calendars should allow for a Swiss review phase. But there’s also an opportunity here to make the system fairer and less monopolised without tearing it down: stronger due-process guarantees inside federation and CAS procedures; default public hearings in rights-heavy cases; better access to evidence for athletes; and a healthier “market” of first-instance fora (specialised chambers, improved federation tribunals, even regional options) with CAS reserved for points that truly need a single international voice. Swiss practice can do its part too, by clarifying how the courts will apply this more intensive review to sports awards.

4. How do you ensure high client satisfaction levels are maintained by your practice?

I keep clients happy by running matters the way I’d want mine run. On day one we agree what we’re doing, how long it should take, and a sensible budget cap. I acknowledge emails the same day and send a brief update at a regular cadence (when something actually moves).

Fees are predictable, fixed or capped where possible, and if scope changes I say so before I do the work. Invoices are in plain English and match the steps you approved. After any hearing or submission, I send a same-day note with the result, what it means, and the next step.

5. What technological advancements are reshaping Sports Law and how can clients benefit from them?

Sport now runs on data, streaming and speed and that’s exactly where the law is shifting. Wearables, video analytics and AI drive decisions on selection, bonuses and rehab, but they also raise privacy and consent issues. I set up the paperwork that lets you use the data without headaches: clear athlete notices, tight vendor terms, and sensible retention so performance insights turn into cleaner contracts, defensible decisions and fewer disputes.

The commercial game has moved, too. The NIL economy means an athlete’s name, image and likeness are assets that need real structure. I turn NIL into something you can safely monetise: standard addenda that fix scope, platforms, territories, approvals, fees and brand-safety, with guardian consent where minors are involved. On the back end, I run a simple monitoring and takedown workflow so unauthorised ads and impostor accounts disappear quickly and you see monthly what was removed and where.

Deals themselves are faster because they’re digital. With enforceable templates and e-signature, agreements that once took weeks now close in days. Notice-and-cure steps, realistic liquidated damages, and email service that actually works mean most payment issues resolve on the paper, not in a courtroom. Version control and renewal alerts keep options, bonuses and expiry dates from slipping through the cracks.

When a dispute can’t be avoided, the forum is increasingly online. Panels and courts accept remote evidence; speed and clarity win. I prepare tight, paginated bundles with a clean chronology and short factual statements, handle tech checks and filing formalities across time zones, and position you for interim measures on short notice so your story lands in minutes, not after a week of chasing documents.