Emergency Interim Measures Before CAS: Protecting Athletes and Clubs in Turkey-Related Disputes – 2026 Updated Guide

Learn how foreign athletes and clubs can seek emergency interim measures before CAS in 2026, including stays of execution, irreparable harm, likelihood of success, urgent applications and Turkey-related sports disputes.

In international sports disputes, obtaining a favorable final award months later may be meaningless if the athlete has already missed a championship, the player cannot register for a new club, a suspension has already been served or another irreversible sporting consequence has occurred. For this reason, the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) has mechanisms allowing athletes and clubs to request provisional and conservatory measures before the merits of an appeal are finally decided.

These remedies can be particularly important in Turkey-related disputes involving foreign professional athletes, football players, coaches and clubs. A foreign player may challenge a decision affecting registration or eligibility, a club may face an immediate sporting sanction, or an athlete may need urgent protection before an important competition.

Under the current CAS Code, which remains the central procedural framework in 2026, Article R37 governs provisional and conservatory measures. CAS may grant urgent relief where the applicable requirements are satisfied, but such protection is exceptional rather than automatic. (TAS / CAS)

For athletes and clubs, the critical question is therefore not simply whether the underlying decision is wrong. They must demonstrate why CAS intervention is required before the final appeal is decided.

What Are Emergency Interim Measures Before CAS?

Interim measures are temporary orders designed to preserve rights or prevent serious harm while the underlying arbitration remains pending.

They do not ordinarily determine the final merits of the dispute.

For example, an athlete suspended from competition may request temporary suspension of the challenged decision while CAS considers the appeal. A football club may seek a stay where immediate enforcement of a decision would cause sporting consequences that could not realistically be reversed after the season.

CAS itself confirms that it may order interim measures within a short timeframe or stay the execution of a federation or governing body’s decision until the dispute is determined. (TAS / CAS)

The precise relief requested should always be tailored to the disputed decision.

What Is a Stay of Execution?

A stay of execution temporarily suspends the effects of the challenged decision.

Suppose a foreign athlete competing in Turkey receives a federation decision imposing a suspension that takes immediate effect. The athlete appeals the final internal decision to CAS.

If the competition calendar means the suspension will effectively be served before CAS can decide the appeal, the athlete may consider requesting that CAS stay execution of the decision.

Similarly, where a football-related decision has immediate registration or sporting consequences, provisional relief may become strategically important.

Article R48 of the CAS Code expressly provides that a Statement of Appeal may include an application to stay execution of the decision appealed against, together with the reasons supporting the request. (TAS / CAS)

Does Filing a CAS Appeal Automatically Suspend the Decision?

No.

Athletes and clubs should not assume that filing a Statement of Appeal automatically freezes the challenged decision.

The appeal and the request for interim relief are separate procedural issues.

Where immediate protection is required, the appellant should consider making a properly reasoned application for provisional measures or a stay.

This distinction can be decisive. An athlete may successfully commence a CAS appeal while remaining subject to the disputed sporting sanction unless interim relief is separately obtained.

Article R37 of the CAS Code

Article R37 is the principal CAS provision governing provisional and conservatory measures.

Before the Panel has been constituted, the President of the relevant CAS Division may decide the application. After the case has been transferred to the Panel, the Panel itself can determine the request. (TAS / CAS)

This structure enables CAS to respond to urgent situations without requiring the parties to wait for completion of the entire tribunal-constitution process.

Where circumstances are extremely urgent, Article R37 even permits an order to be issued upon presentation of the application, subject to the opposing party subsequently being heard. (TAS / CAS)

That possibility is reserved for genuinely urgent circumstances.

The Three Main Tests for CAS Interim Relief

Article R37 identifies three central considerations when CAS determines whether provisional relief should be granted.

CAS considers whether the requested relief is necessary to protect the applicant from irreparable harm, whether there is a likelihood of success on the merits, and whether the interests of the applicant outweigh those of the respondent or respondents. (TAS / CAS)

These requirements should form the structure of an emergency application.

Simply stating that the federation’s decision is unfair will generally be insufficient.

The applicant should demonstrate why immediate intervention is necessary, why the underlying appeal has a credible legal basis and why the balance of interests favors temporary protection.

Requirement One: Irreparable Harm

Irreparable harm is frequently the most important issue.

In sports, financial compensation cannot always repair the consequences of a decision.

Consider a professional athlete who is prevented from participating in a major championship scheduled in two weeks.

If CAS eventually decides six months later that the suspension was unlawful, the athlete cannot return to the past and participate in the missed competition.

Likewise, missing a transfer window, qualification event, championship final or decisive stage of a professional season may create consequences that cannot be fully repaired through money.

The interim application should therefore identify specific and imminent harm, not merely general inconvenience.

Is Financial Loss Enough?

Purely financial loss may sometimes be more difficult to characterize as irreparable because money can potentially be compensated later.

Sports disputes, however, frequently involve consequences extending beyond financial damage.

A player prevented from registering may lose an entire competitive period. An athlete excluded from an event may lose a unique career opportunity. A club facing immediate sporting consequences may suffer competitive effects that cannot simply be reconstructed after a favorable award.

The applicant should therefore explain the sporting, professional and career consequences rather than relying only on a monetary figure.

Requirement Two: Likelihood of Success on the Merits

CAS also considers the likelihood that the applicant will ultimately succeed.

The provisional-measures application is not the full appeal, but the applicant must show that the underlying case has sufficient substance to justify temporary protection.

Relevant arguments may concern incorrect application of federation regulations, procedural violations, contractual interpretation, disproportionality, jurisdiction or another material error in the challenged decision.

The objective at this stage is not necessarily to prove the entire case conclusively.

The applicant must nevertheless present a credible legal and factual basis demonstrating that the appeal is not speculative.

Requirement Three: Balance of Interests

CAS also compares the competing interests of the parties.

The applicant should explain why granting temporary protection would cause less prejudice than refusing it.

For example, an athlete may argue that temporary participation preserves the possibility of meaningful relief while exclusion would permanently destroy the opportunity to compete.

The respondent federation may argue that immediate enforcement is necessary to preserve sporting integrity, regulatory consistency or the interests of other competitors.

CAS must balance these competing considerations.

Article R37 expressly requires consideration of whether the applicant’s interests outweigh those of the respondent or respondents. (TAS / CAS)

CAS Must Have Prima Facie Jurisdiction

Emergency relief cannot be separated from jurisdiction.

Article R37 requires the relevant CAS authority to first address prima facie CAS jurisdiction when dealing with an application for provisional measures. If CAS clearly lacks jurisdiction, the Division President may terminate the arbitration procedure. (TAS / CAS)

The applicant should therefore identify the provision establishing CAS jurisdiction.

This may be contained in the statutes or regulations of the relevant international federation, national federation, sports organization or an arbitration agreement.

An emergency application without a credible jurisdictional basis can fail before the substantive urgency is even considered.

Internal Remedies Must First Be Exhausted

This is one of the most important procedural restrictions.

Under Article R37, a party cannot request provisional or conservatory measures under the CAS procedural rules before exhausting the internal legal remedies provided by the relevant federation or sports body. (TAS / CAS)

Article R47 similarly provides that an appeal against a federation or sports-body decision may be filed with CAS where the relevant arbitration basis exists and the appellant has exhausted the available internal remedies required by the applicable rules. (TAS / CAS)

A foreign athlete involved in Turkey should therefore determine whether an appeal to a federation disciplinary board, arbitration board or other internal body must first be completed.

Going directly to CAS too early can create a jurisdictional problem.

How Quickly Can CAS Decide an Emergency Request?

CAS can act quickly when circumstances justify it.

Ordinarily, Article R37 provides for the opposing party to be invited to express its position within ten days or a shorter period if circumstances require.

CAS then decides the application on an expedited basis. (TAS / CAS)

Where the situation is exceptionally urgent, the procedural timetable can become significantly shorter.

CAS confirms more generally that interim measures can be ordered within a short timeframe and that expedited proceedings are available for urgent cases, including cases where a decision is required before a sporting competition. (TAS / CAS)

Can CAS Issue an Order Without First Hearing the Other Party?

In cases of utmost urgency, potentially yes.

Article R37 permits the relevant Division President or, after constitution, the President of the Panel to issue an order upon presentation of the application, provided the opposing party is subsequently heard. (TAS / CAS)

This is an exceptional mechanism.

An applicant requesting such immediate intervention should explain precisely why waiting even for a short response period would defeat the purpose of the requested protection.

An upcoming match alone should not automatically be assumed to justify ex parte relief.

The actual timing and irreversible consequences should be demonstrated.

The CHF 1,000 Court Office Fee

A procedural requirement must also be considered.

Under the current Article R37, an applicant requesting provisional measures must pay a non-refundable CHF 1,000 CAS Court Office fee. CAS will not proceed with the request without payment.

If the applicant subsequently files the related Request for Arbitration or Statement of Appeal in the same procedure, that Court Office fee is not paid again. (TAS / CAS)

Foreign athletes and clubs should therefore ensure that procedural and payment requirements are addressed immediately rather than allowing an urgent application to be delayed for administrative reasons.

The CAS Appeal Deadline Still Matters

Requesting emergency relief does not eliminate the requirement to commence the underlying appeal correctly.

Article R37 provides that provisional measures are automatically annulled if, in an appeals case, the applicant fails to file the related Statement of Appeal within the time limit under Article R49. That appeal deadline cannot be extended through the provisional-measures mechanism. (TAS / CAS)

Under Article R49, where the applicable sports body’s regulations or another agreement do not establish a different period, the default CAS appeal deadline is 21 days from receipt of the challenged decision. (TAS / CAS)

An athlete should therefore never focus exclusively on the emergency application while overlooking the deadline for the actual appeal.

Example: Foreign Football Player in Turkey

Consider a foreign professional football player involved in a dispute affecting his ability to participate or register.

The player receives a final appealable decision and believes its immediate enforcement will prevent him from playing during a crucial part of the season.

A properly structured CAS strategy may involve filing the Statement of Appeal within the applicable deadline while simultaneously requesting a stay or provisional measure under Articles R37 and R48.

The application should establish CAS jurisdiction, identify the immediate harm, explain the merits of the appeal and demonstrate why the player’s interests outweigh the competing interests.

The exact remedy will depend on the decision being challenged.

Example: Athlete Facing Suspension Before a Major Competition

Assume a foreign athlete based in Turkey receives a final federation suspension ten days before a major international championship.

The final CAS appeal might not be decided before the event.

If the athlete can demonstrate that missing the championship would create irreparable career harm, that the appeal has a credible likelihood of success and that the balance of interests favors temporary protection, an Article R37 application may become appropriate.

The athlete should provide the competition dates and evidence explaining why the event is unique.

Urgency should be proved, not merely asserted.

Example: Club Facing Immediate Sporting Consequences

Clubs may also seek interim protection.

A club facing a decision with immediate competitive or regulatory effects may argue that implementation before CAS review would cause irreversible consequences.

The club should distinguish between damage that can later be compensated financially and sporting consequences that cannot realistically be undone.

The requested order should also be proportionate.

An excessively broad request may be harder to justify than narrowly tailored temporary protection preserving the status quo until the dispute is decided.

Correctly Identify the Respondent

Identifying the proper respondent is especially important where the requested interim measure requires action from a federation or sports body.

A Turkey-related CAS case illustrates this risk. In CAS 2008/A/1602, involving Çaykur Rizespor, CAS emphasized that it cannot simply add a third party to arbitration and that the appellant is responsible for identifying the proper respondents at the outset. (TAS / CAS – Jurisprudence)

This can become critical where the appellant asks CAS to suspend or alter a regulatory consequence imposed by an organization that has not been properly made a party to the proceeding.

Party identification should therefore be reviewed before filing the Statement of Appeal and emergency request.

What Evidence Should Support an Emergency Application?

The evidence should be directly connected to urgency and harm.

An athlete may provide the challenged decision, competition calendar, registration deadlines, contractual documentation, federation correspondence, qualification records and evidence concerning the professional consequences of exclusion.

A club may submit competition schedules, registration rules, federation correspondence and documents establishing the consequences of immediate enforcement.

Evidence concerning the merits should also be included where necessary.

The strongest applications usually combine a concise factual chronology with documents proving each major assertion.

Can CAS Require Security?

Yes.

Article R37 expressly provides that provisional or conservatory measures may be made conditional upon the provision of security. (TAS / CAS)

Whether security is appropriate depends on the particular dispute and the relief requested.

Applicants should therefore recognize that even where provisional relief is available, CAS may impose conditions designed to protect competing interests.

Interim Measures and Expedited Proceedings Are Different

These mechanisms should not be confused.

An interim measure provides temporary protection while the underlying dispute continues.

An expedited procedure, by contrast, accelerates the determination of the merits themselves.

In some urgent sports cases, an athlete or club may need both strategies considered.

For example, the appellant may request an immediate stay while also seeking accelerated resolution of the full appeal before an important sporting event.

CAS confirms that proceedings may be expedited where urgency requires a decision before a competition. (TAS / CAS)

Special 2026 Example: FIFA World Cup CAS Ad Hoc Division

The 2026 FIFA World Cup provides an important example of how sports arbitration can respond to extreme time pressure.

For the final competition, CAS established a special ad hoc division operating from June 11 through July 19, 2026. FIFA explained that eligible tournament-related appeals could be resolved through expedited arbitration, with decisions potentially issued within 48 hours, after internal legal channels had been exhausted. (legal.fifa.com)

The World Cup ad hoc mechanism has now completed its specified tournament period, but it illustrates the broader principle that international sports disputes sometimes require decisions within hours rather than months.

The permanent CAS framework continues to provide Article R37 provisional measures for qualifying disputes.

2026 Procedural Framework

For cases filed during 2026, practitioners should use the current CAS Code, whose latest version entered into force on July 1, 2025. (TAS / CAS)

Article R37 remains central to emergency relief. Articles R47 through R49 are particularly important in appeal cases because they address CAS jurisdiction, Statement of Appeal requirements and appeal deadlines.

Foreign athletes and clubs should therefore be cautious about relying on old online guides based on earlier versions of the CAS Code.

The procedural framework applicable when the case is filed should always be verified.

Practical Strategy for an Emergency CAS Application

The first step is identifying exactly what will happen if CAS does nothing. The applicant should determine the next competition, registration deadline, suspension date or other event creating urgency.

The internal federation remedies and CAS jurisdiction should then be verified immediately.

The applicant should prepare the Statement of Appeal within the applicable deadline and formulate a narrowly defined request for interim relief. The application should address irreparable harm, likelihood of success and balance of interests separately and support each element with evidence.

Where the matter is exceptionally urgent, the filing should explain why an ordinary response timetable would itself make effective relief impossible.

The goal is not to exaggerate urgency. It is to demonstrate it.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. Can CAS temporarily suspend a sports federation decision?

Potentially, yes. Article R37 allows CAS to order provisional and conservatory measures, while Article R48 expressly permits an appellant to request a stay of execution of the challenged decision. (TAS / CAS)

2. Does filing a CAS appeal automatically stop a suspension?

No. A stay or other provisional measure generally needs to be requested separately and justified under the applicable CAS requirements.

3. What must an athlete prove to obtain emergency CAS protection?

CAS considers irreparable harm, likelihood of success on the merits and whether the applicant’s interests outweigh those of the respondent. (TAS / CAS)

4. Can an athlete request CAS interim measures before exhausting federation appeals?

Under Article R37, no party may apply for provisional measures under the CAS procedural rules before exhausting the internal legal remedies provided by the relevant federation or sports body. (TAS / CAS)

5. How quickly can CAS grant emergency interim relief?

The timetable depends on the urgency. The respondent is ordinarily given an opportunity to respond, but CAS can shorten the response period and, in cases of utmost urgency, may issue an order before hearing the opposing party, subject to that party subsequently being heard. (TAS / CAS)

6. What is irreparable harm in a sports dispute?

It generally concerns harm that cannot adequately be repaired after the final award. Missing a unique championship, losing an irreplaceable competitive opportunity or suffering certain immediate sporting consequences can potentially support such an argument depending on the facts.

7. Can a football player seek interim relief in a dispute involving a Turkish club?

Potentially, provided CAS has jurisdiction, internal remedies have been exhausted where required and the requirements for provisional relief are satisfied. The exact remedy depends on the challenged decision and its immediate consequences.

8. Does an emergency CAS request cancel the normal appeal deadline?

No. In an appeals case, the Statement of Appeal must still be filed within the applicable Article R49 deadline. Failure to do so results in the provisional measures being automatically annulled. (TAS / CAS)

9. Can CAS decide an urgent request before the full Panel is appointed?

Yes. Before the file is transferred to the Panel, the President of the relevant CAS Division can decide provisional-measures applications. (TAS / CAS)

10. Can CAS require the athlete or club to provide security?

Yes. Article R37 expressly permits provisional or conservatory measures to be made conditional upon security. (TAS / CAS)

Legal Support for Emergency CAS Proceedings and Turkey-Related Sports Disputes

Emergency sports disputes require immediate legal action because a successful final award may provide little practical value once a competition, registration period or unique sporting opportunity has already passed. The strategy must therefore address both the ultimate appeal and the need for immediate protection.

Fırat Fesih Kaya Law Office provides legal assistance to foreign professional athletes, football players, coaches, foreign clubs and sports-sector professionals in Turkey-related matters involving CAS appeals, emergency interim measures, requests for stays of execution, FIFA disputes, contractual disputes, disciplinary decisions and international sports arbitration.

If a decision involving Turkey threatens your immediate eligibility, registration, participation in a competition or other important sporting rights, you may contact our office for a case-specific legal assessment. Early sports-law assistance can help determine CAS jurisdiction, protect strict appeal deadlines, evaluate whether emergency interim relief is available and prepare the evidence required to demonstrate irreparable harm and urgency.

Phone: +90 312 434 22 22
Mobile Phone: +90 532 769 22 22
Email: info@firatfesihkaya.av.tr
Address: Mevlana Boulevard No: 221, Yildirim Tower No: 148, 06520 Balgat, Cankaya, Ankara, Turkey