Other Sports — Law & Regulation FAQ

No. Professional and Olympic boxing are governed separately. Professional boxing has multiple competing sanctioning bodies — including the IBF, WBA, WBC and WBO — each with its own rules and title structures, while Olympic-eligible boxing is currently overseen by World Boxing.

Depending on the sanctioning body’s own rules, disputes may go through an internal appeals process first, with CAS available as a further forum in Olympic-related or federation-affiliated matters.

Not automatically — each body operates its own rulebook and ranking system, which is part of why professional boxing often has several simultaneous ‘world champions’ in the same weight class.

Licensing is typically handled at national or state/regional commission level (for example, a national boxing board of control), separate from the international sanctioning bodies that recognise title fights.

Yes — boxing commissions generally require medical clearance (including neurological and cardiac screening) before licensing, and can suspend or deny a license on medical safety grounds.

Olympic-eligible boxing follows WADA rules through World Boxing. Professional boxing’s anti-doping enforcement varies by sanctioning body and jurisdiction, and is not uniformly centralised the way Olympic sports are.

Exclusivity and option-clause disputes, purse and compensation disagreements, and disputes over a promoter’s ability to mandate or block a particular fight are common — these are typically governed by the specific promotional contract and resolved through ordinary contract law or the sanctioning body’s own dispute process, rather than a unified international tribunal.

The Fédération Internationale de Volleyball (FIVB) governs the international game, with continental confederations (including the African confederation) overseeing regional competition.

Yes — the FIVB, like most Olympic federations, recognises CAS’s jurisdiction for appeals from its internal disciplinary and eligibility decisions.

Common categories include unsporting conduct toward officials, doping violations under the applicable anti-doping code, and, at club level, financial or contractual disputes referred to the relevant federation’s dispute-resolution body.

The International Handball Federation (IHF) sets the rules of the international game, with continental bodies governing regional competitions.

Yes, generally through the IHF’s internal process in the first instance, with CAS available as the final appellate forum for federation-level disputes.

World Rugby sets the international Laws of the Game and regulatory framework; Rugby Africa governs the sport across the African continent under that framework, with national unions handling domestic competition.

Yes — World Rugby recognises CAS as the final appellate body for regulatory and disciplinary matters, after a union’s or tournament’s own internal disciplinary process is exhausted.

A citing is a post-match disciplinary referral for an incident a match official may not have seen or sanctioned adequately during play, raised by an appointed citing commissioner. It’s a separate process from an on-field red card, though both can lead to a suspension.

World Rugby uses a framework of sanction entry points by offence category (low, mid, top end), which a judicial officer or panel then adjusts up or down based on aggravating or mitigating factors before setting the final suspension.

Yes — World Rugby’s anti-doping regulations are built on the World Anti-Doping Code, applying the same standard two-year/four-year sanction structure used across Olympic sport.

The International Cricket Council (ICC) governs international cricket globally; national boards (such as Cricket South Africa, Cricket Kenya, and others) govern the domestic game and are ICC members.

Yes — the ICC Anti-Corruption Code specifically addresses match-fixing, spot-fixing, and related corrupt conduct, separate from its general Code of Conduct covering on-field discipline.

It covers fixing or contriving the result, progress, or any aspect of a match; failing to report approaches by corrupt parties; and betting on matches one is involved in, among other offences — enforced through the ICC’s own Anti-Corruption Unit.

Through the ICC’s own anti-corruption tribunal process in the first instance, with an appeal route available depending on the specific charge and the player or official’s home board’s regulations.

Yes — the ICC’s anti-doping rules are built on the World Anti-Doping Code, applying the same core sanction structure used across other Olympic and international sports.