Uruguay considers voluntary and consenting doping a crime under Law No 14,996 (1980). Athletes who supply themselves or consent to a third party providing them with a depressive or stimulant drug to abnormally decrease or increase sports performance can be punished by three months to three years in prison, if the conduct does not constitute a more serious crime. The sentence may be reduced by one third to a half if the substance consumed is harmless to the athlete’s health due to the nature of the substance or the dose taken. However, doping or the use of prohibited substances by athletes is subject to disciplinary sanctions by the National Anti-Doping Organisation of Uruguay (Organización Nacional Antidopaje del Uruguay or ONAU).

Doping Sanctions for Use of Social Drugs (Substance Abuse)

In Uruguay, the use of social drugs included in the World Anti-Doping Agency’s (WADA) list of prohibited substances, such as cocaine and heroin, outside sports is not considered a crime, but is rather treated as an addiction. However, Article 4.2.3 of the WADA Anti-Doping Code classifies this type of prohibited substance as a substance of abuse. If it is proven that its use was outside competition and unrelated to sporting performance, it is punishable by a three-month suspension, which can be reduced to one month if the athlete has started undergoing treatment or has initiated a programme against the use of such substances.

ONAU

The ONAU is responsible for preventing and controlling doping in Uruguay. The ONAU is under the authority of the Uruguay Sports Foundation (Fundación Deporte Uruguay), an institution created in 2002 and comprised of the National Secretariat of Sport (Secretaría Nacional del Deporte) and the Olympic Committee of Uruguay (Comité Olímpico Uruguayo Uruguaya).

The ONAU operates in accordance with the rules of the WADA World Anti-Doping Code, and its mission is to eradicate doping in sports in Uruguay. Its programme is founded on “the spirit of sport”: the ethical pursuit of human excellence through the dedicated perfection of each athlete’s natural talents (in other words, the integrity of sport and fair play).

The World Anti-Doping Code Implemented in Uruguay

Uruguay’s National Anti-Doping Code is based entirely on the WADA World Anti-Doping Code, and was last  updated in 2021.

Examples of any Recent Noteworthy Anti-doping Cases

In the last seven years or so there have been at least 13 doping cases; some were national cases while others were international.

The last involved a very well-known football player, Agustín Canobbio, who played for Atletico Peñarol, one of Uruguay’s most important football clubs (he currently plays for Paranaense, a Brazilian club). He also plays for Uruguay’s national team, and was part of the team that played in the 2022 FIFA World Cup in Qatar. This firm handled this particular case.

In August 2021, Canobbio was notified of an adverse analytical finding following a doping test conducted in Lima, Perú, after a match against Sporting Cristal during the Conmebol South American Cup. The prohibited substance found in Canobbio’s system was an anabolic steroid called “boldenona”, which is prohibited in Uruguay, though in Perú it is legally supplied to cattle, chickens and other animals for fattening.

The player was notified of the adverse analytical finding seven days before the second semi-final match against Paranaense in Brazil, posing two significant problems. The first objective was to quickly prove that the adverse analytical finding could have been owing to contamination from eating meat or chicken in Perú. This had to be proven within three days to avoid a provisional suspension and to allow him to play in the second semi-final. The second objective was to prove the contamination. He was facing a potentially career-ending suspension of two to four years (he was 23 years old at the time).

This firm was successful in achieving the first objective, and was able to convince the Disciplinary Commission that the boldenona found in the player’s system was due to the consumption of contaminated meat or chicken. As a result, the Commission decided not to impose a provisional suspension, allowing the player to participate in the semi-final match against Paranaense. He was also able to compete in the national championship with his club Peñarol and join the Uruguayan national team in the South American Qualifying rounds for Qatar 2022.

Ultimately, this firm was able to demonstrate with a high degree of probability that the adverse analytical finding was due to contamination from the consumption of contaminated meat or chicken. As a result, the Disciplinary Commission issued a warning to the player on 4 March 2022, and he was able to continue playing with Peñarol. He was later transferred to Paranaense, where he currently plays, and he represented the Uruguayan national team in Qatar 2022.

Unsportsmanlike Pacts

In Uruguay, Law No 14,996 criminalises unsporting pacts, which involve delivering or offering gifts or rewards to another to ensure or facilitate the irregular result of a sports competition or the abnormal performance of one or more participants. This crime carries a penalty of three months to four years in prison, unless it constitutes a more serious crime. Anyone who accepts such gifts or rewards for themself or a third party is subject to the same punishment.

In Uruguay, there is a prevailing view in the legal and academic community that this law does not punish those who offer or receive incentives to strive harder to achieve a result, such as a win, because the incentive is not intended to modify the athlete’s normal behaviour. Rather, the incentive is seen as a means to motivate the athlete to maintain their normal behaviour in pursuit of victory.

Disciplinary Sanctions

Unsportsmanlike conduct is also subject to disciplinary or ethical codes established by sports federations.

For instance, Article 11 of the Disciplinary Code of the Uruguayan Football Association (Asociación Uruguaya de Fútbol or AUF) is dedicated to “Incentives and Bribes”, outlining the consequences for anyone who offers or accepts an illegal reward, such as money, to alter the normal performance of a player or the outcome of a match or competition. Individuals found guilty of such conduct may face suspensions ranging from one to two years, while clubs may be suspended from membership for 12 to 24 months. The severity of these penalties is increased to the maximum extent when the conduct affects club promotions or relegations. Finally, it is also important to know that in cases of incentives and bribes, the competent court may rule based on moral conviction.

As can be seen, the Disciplinary Code reiterates the wording of Law 14,996 in respect of the crime of unsportsmanlike pacts; what is punished is the offering and taking of an incentive to alter the normal performance of players, or the outcome of matches.

However, there are those who consider that an incentive for a player to make a greater effort should also be punished, as it is an incentive that seeks to alter the player’s normal performance.

Finally, it bears highlighting that in November 2022 the AUF began an integrity programme for players and officials of its competitions, in order to identify match fixing and to protect the sport.

Recent Noteworthy Misconduct/Match-Fixing Cases

In the professional football scene, there have been no cases of incentives and bribes reported by the AUF for many years now. However, in 2022, a case of attempted bribery of a referee in amateur football was brought to light by the Interior Football Organisation (Organización de Fútbol del Interior or OFI), resulting in a club’s membership being suspended for six months. Although it was never proven whether the person who had attempted the bribe was a club official (a necessary condition for imposing a sanction on a club), the disciplinary court understood that it could punish the club based on moral conviction – ie, it had the moral conviction that the person who had attempted the bribe was a club official (albeit one who was never identified), and therefore decided to sanction the club. In this case, there was only a disciplinary sanction, and no criminal sanctions were brought.

Another case of bribery occurred in basketball, linked to clandestine gambling, which did reach the criminal justice system. In 2019, a player from one team attempted to offer an incentive to members of the opposing team to alter their performance and let his team win. Although the unsportsmanlike conduct had no effect, as the team that was meant to lose actually won, the Sports Federation sanctioned several athletes with suspensions lasting two years or longer. In addition, the players were subject to an expedited procedure by the criminal justice system, which ultimately resulted in a six-month community service sentence.

Sports Betting in Uruguay

Sports betting is permitted in Uruguay, but under strict regulations that grant a monopoly to the National Directorate of Lotteries and Quinielas (Dirección Nacional de Loterías y Quinielas or DNLQ), under the Ministry of Economy.

However, the DNLQ authorises private companies known as Official Quiniela Agents (Agentes Oficiales de Quinielas) to operate sports-betting games.

Legislation governing betting in Uruguay

The main law governing betting is Law No 15,959 of 16 December 1882, which prohibits games of chance or fortune, with the exception of the lottery and public raffles authorised by the Administrative Economic Boards.

The DNLQ was granted the monopoly in gambling by Law No 15,716 in 1985, which allowed it to authorise Official Agents to operate.

The DNLQ was further empowered to organise international sports prediction and online gambling competitions by Law No 17453 in 2002. Decree 175/2002 gave the DNLQ the authority to regulate sports betting and internet games. “Supermatch” is currently the main sports-betting game in Uruguay.

There are no regulations from sports federations stipulating betting as a punishable offence, and there is no system by which sports federations share information with authorised betting operators.

Examples of recent noteworthy sports-betting cases

There are no known cases of violations of betting rules for which athletes have faced either disciplinary or criminal sanctions. However, see 1.2 Integrity regarding the basketball players who were charged for an unsportsmanlike pact related to illegal betting.

Furthermore, two administrative proceedings have been initiated by the DNLQ against Conmebol for broadcasting football matches in the Copa Conmebol Libertadores de América and Copa Conmebol Sudamericana that displayed advertising in stadiums from international sports-betting houses not authorised by the DNLQ. In the first case, Conmebol was ordered to cease advertising; while in the second, a significant fine was imposed, which Conmebol has appealed. The outcome of the appeal remains pending.

Conmebol filed a motion of unconstitutionality against the decree on which the DNLQ based its administrative proceedings. This motion was brought before the Supreme Court of Justice of Uruguay, which has yet to issue a decision.

Disciplinary Proceedings in Uruguayan Football

According to the Disciplinary Code of the AUF, there are two types of disciplinary proceedings in Uruguayan football.

Expedited procedure

The expedited procedure is a short process used for minor cases, such as sanctions of no more than two matches of suspension, fines of less than UYU150, and others. In these cases, a decision is made in a single session, and once adopted, the file and the decision are made available to interested parties. These parties have two days to request a review of the decision by providing new evidence. If necessary, a hearing is held where the decision will be issued. If a hearing is not necessary, the court shall adopt the new decision within three days after the above-mentioned two-day period. A decision made under this procedure is not appealable.

Ordinary procedure

The ordinary procedure, on the other hand, offers more guarantees than the expedited procedure for cases of sanctions greater than those mentioned above.

Once the matter has been reported to the court, a resolution will be issued where the court will order the investigation of the case, along with procedural measures and processing of relevant evidence. The court could decide that the case file be made confidential. It may also order the preventative suspension of the accused, by means of a resolution substantiated in accordance with the Disciplinary Code.

The case file is made available to interested parties for four working days, during which they can file their comments in writing and propose evidence. This is the only opportunity to request and offer evidence.

Once the parties have filed their comments, the court convenes a hearing within two working days, where it hears the parties, takes into account the relevant evidence, and considers their arguments. At the conclusion of the hearing, the court issues a decision. If necessary owing to the complexity of the case, the court may issue its decision within two working days after the hearing. If the parties fail to file their comments, the court will issue a decision within two working days after the expiration of the period in which the parties could file comments.

An example of the above procedure is the claim made by Club Nacional de Football against Club Atlético Cerro Largo. The claim was made because the trainer of Cerro Largo, who was given a suspension, gave instructions via his mobile phone during half-time. The Disciplinary Committee ruled in favour of Club Nacional de Football and declared them the winner of the match. However, Cerro Largo appealed the decision to the AUF Appeal Commission, which overturned the decision. Finally, the CAS admitted the appeal issued by Club Nacional de Football and declared them the winner of the match.

Disciplinary Proceedings in Doping Cases

The Anti-Doping Code of the ONAU outlines the disciplinary proceedings against athletes.

Notification of a potential anti-doping rule violation

The ONAU is responsible for preventing and controlling doping in the country. If the ONAU suspects an athlete of violating the anti-doping rules, it will conduct a review and provide notification accordingly. However, before notifying the athlete of the potential violation, the ONAU must determine whether any prior anti-doping rule violations are on record.

Provisional suspensions

According to the Anti-Doping Code, if the ONAU receives an adverse analytical finding or an adverse passport finding for a prohibited substance that is not a specified substance, they will impose a provisional suspension on the athlete promptly after the review and notification. However, if the athlete can prove that the adverse analytical finding resulted from a contaminated product or a substance of abuse used outside the sports field, the mandatory provisional suspension may be lifted. The ONAU cannot impose a provisional suspension if the prohibited substance found is a specified substance. In the event of provisional suspensions, the athlete is entitled to a hearing, and the decision may be appealed through an expedited process.

A fair hearing

For any athlete accused of violating anti-doping rules, the ONAU must provide a fair hearing within a reasonable time by a fair, impartial and independent hearing panel in compliance with the Anti-Doping Code.

Notice of decisions

At the end of the hearing, the Disciplinary Tribunal issues a written decision that includes the reasons for the decision, the sanction and the disqualification of results. If the severest consequences were not imposed, the decision must include a justification for this. The ONAU will notify the athlete and other relevant anti-doping organisations of the decision, which may be appealed. An example of this process is the case of Uruguayan athlete Andrés Silva, who was given a six-month suspension by the ONAU owing to an adverse analytical finding resulting from a contaminated product. Despite this sanction, he was able to participate in the Rio de Janeiro 2016 Olympic Games.

Commercial Rights Related to Sport

In Uruguay, as in the rest of the world, the commercial rights associated with sport include:

• merchandising;
• sponsorship and advertising;
• broadcasting;
• image rights;
• ticket sales;
• social membership fees; and
• especially in football, the federative and economic rights of players.

However, the secondary sale of tickets for public shows is prohibited in Uruguay, and is considered a criminal offence under Article 360 of the Criminal Code. The penalty for this offence is seven to 30 days of community work.

In terms of player’s federative and economic rights, Law No 14,996 prohibits the assignment of athletes’ rights to natural or legal persons that are not sports entities. This type of transfer is what FIFA refers to as TPO (third-party ownership) and is considered a civil offence rather than a criminal one. Most Uruguayan courts interpret this offence as making the assignment contract null and void.

Sponsorship is a vital source of funding for sports in Uruguay. However, obtaining sponsorship is not an easy task for clubs and athletes owing to the country’s small population of only 3.5 million people. The country’s main sport is football, and there are numerous clubs in Montevideo, many of which have small numbers of members or supporters. For example, in some neighbourhoods, there are three different clubs playing in the same division within a span of just six blocks. While it is a challenge for smaller clubs to secure sponsors, it is relatively easy for big clubs such as Club Atlético Peñarol and Club Nacional de Football as they have over 90,000 members.

Similarly, athletes also face difficulties in securing sponsors owing to the small size of the country. However, it is relatively easier for international athletes to obtain sponsorship, as many receive funding from state-owned companies such as Ancap, Antel and Banco de Seguros del Estado. Some well-known athletes who have received sponsorship from these companies include:

• Santiago Urrutia (a driver competing in the World Touring Car Cup);
• Deborah Rodríguez and Andrés Silva (athletes);
• Facundo Llambías (a superbike racer); and
• Pablo Cuevas (a tennis player).

Overall, owing to the small size of the country and the saturation of sports clubs, it is not very enticing for companies to sponsor most clubs or athletes in Uruguay.

Sponsorship contracts establish:

• the period of the contract;
• the contribution;
• the rights of the company; and
• the obligations of the athlete or club.

In Uruguay, broadcasting and particularly television rights are among the primary sources of income, especially in football. In the past, television rights related to Uruguayan football were not individually negotiated by clubs. Instead, the AUF negotiated for all clubs, ensuring that smaller clubs were also part of the global negotiations and benefitted from them.

However, three or four major clubs started negotiating independently to earn greater profits. In 2022, the Uruguayan Professional Football League was established in order to have greater autonomy from the AUF, especially from a financial perspective, such as in relation to broadcasting rights.

Since 1998, Tenfield, a Uruguayan company, has held television rights. However, in recent years, there has been a significant dispute between the AUF and Tenfield over these rights. The AUF has launched a private channel called AUF TV, where competitions or matches that Tenfield does not have the right to broadcast (such as women’s football, national team matches, and news) are shown.

Proprietary Rights in Sports Events

In Uruguay, the organiser of a sports event holds the rights generated by it, although in some cases these rights may be delegated to sports institutions who ultimately end up organising the event.

For instance, in football, the AUF Statute states that the AUF is the organiser of sports events related to international football (FIFA and CONMEBOL) that take place in Uruguay, as well as national competitions. However, Article 76 of the Statute allows the AUF Executive Council to delegate the organisation to its members or the respective leagues, which is usually the case. In practice, the clubs organise football matches, and therefore set ticket prices and benefit from the revenue.

Regarding consumers, Law No 17,250 grants rights and benefits to consumers that also apply to spectators who attend sports events. The government is also involved in events, as it is responsible for ensuring the safety and conditions of the stadiums where they take place. The government may also prohibit the use of a stadium for a given event until certain conditions are met.

Liability of Sports Event Organisers

Organisers of sporting events have a legal responsibility for any damages that occur during the event, bearing both civil and criminal liability depending on the situation. In football, Article 5 of the Disciplinary Code of the AUF sets out strict liability for sports institutions that organise events. They are responsible for any punishable acts that occur in the stadium or sports venue before, during and after the match. This includes incidents of any nature that disrupt the normal development of the event or result in aggression towards referees, technicians, other officials, club authorities, journalists, police officers or members of the public. The liability also extends to:

• damage caused to facilities;
• destruction of emblems of institutions;
• the throwing of certain objects;
• the use of unauthorised pyrotechnics; or
• any attempt to invade the playing field.

Athletes can also be held liable to spectators or other athletes for any damage they cause directly, and this is without prejudice to the liability of the event organiser.

Law 17,951 regulates violence in sports events, setting out measures aimed at the prevention, control and eradication of violence, and establishes an Honorary Commission for this purpose. This law also provides for:

• the prohibiting of alcoholic beverages at events;
• the inclusion of certain violations and criminal offences related to violence in sports in the Criminal Code; and
• the establishing of a registry of people that have committed these types of crimes.

Facial recognition cameras have also been implemented in stadiums, and spectators are required to provide their ID number when purchasing tickets.

Legal Forms of Sporting Bodies

In Uruguay, sports institutions can take the legal form of a non-profit civil association or a sports limited company (SAD), according to Law No 19,828. However, SADs, despite having a profit-oriented purpose, are subject to certain special conditions as outlined in Article 70 of Law No 17292 and Regulatory Decree 486/001. These conditions include having:

• a special object linked to competition in sports;
• nominative shares;
• a minimum and maximum number of board members; and
• registration with the National Sports Secretariat.

In recent years, SADs have become a popular legal form for the acquisition of football clubs, particularly since FIFA banned TPOs in 2015 (as stated in Article 18 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players). This is owing to several factors, such as the ability to attract investments, assign economic rights of players and enable the SADs’ boards (which typically consists of a few members) to make decisions rather than the members of a civil association.

Sport-Specific Corporate Governance

In Uruguay, each sports federation has its own regulations that govern the participation of clubs and athletes, as well as the relationship between the federation and the clubs. Matters relating to statutes and compliance with them are overseen by public bodies. For example, the Ministry of Education and Culture regulates and controls matters related to civil associations in sport, including elections and compliance with statutes. The National Sports Secretariat also regulates these civil associations, especially SADs, which are also regulated by the National Internal Audit Office (Auditoría Interna de la Nación).

In the event of insolvency, SADs are subject to Uruguay’s bankruptcy laws. However, football clubs that owe salaries to players, coaches or physical trainers, per final decisions of the AUF’s courts, cannot participate in any new competitions until such debts are paid or a payment agreement is reached with creditors.

Central Government Resource

The National Secretariat of Sport, which falls under the jurisdiction of the Presidency of the Republic, offers an economic support programme for athletes and sports institutions. To access this programme, interested parties must submit a request, along with an explanation of their reasons for seeking support, endorsement from the corresponding federation or sports institution, and all the required documentation as specified by the Secretariat.

Additionally, the Sports Promotion Law No 18,833 allows sports institutions to obtain tax benefits by presenting a project aimed at improving the training conditions of athletes (especially youths), infrastructure for sports activities and the performance of federated athletes, among other things. Beneficiaries may include sports federations, professional football and basketball clubs, and even sponsors. Projects must be submitted during certain periods of the year, and the benefits, which are limited, come in the form of tax exemptions.

It is worth noting that, currently, sports institutions do not receive any economic support related to COVID-19.

One of the most innovative developments in recent years in Uruguay’s football scene was the temporary acquisition of the Civil Association Club Atlético Torque by an SAD managed by City Football Group, which owns Manchester City. This happened when the team was in the second division, and since then, Montevideo City Torque (the team was renamed in 2020) has become one of the most well-developed teams in Uruguay. The club now boasts an excellent sports complex, and in recent years has participated in international championships organised by CONMEBOL.

Although other SADs have attempted to replicate this model, they have not achieved the same level of success as Montevideo City Torque.

Trade marks can be registered with the National Directorate of Industrial Property of the Ministry of Industry, Energy and Mining. The registration procedure can be done online, but a user account must be created first. It is also recommended to conduct a search about the trade mark intended to be registered, which is free of cost.

In Uruguay, this topic is regulated by Law No 17011. Article 4 sets up different elements that cannot be registered, such as the name of a country, national symbols, signs similar to coins, techniques, etc.

While registering a trade mark is not mandatory in Uruguay, it is highly recommended. This is because the registration provides the benefit of legal presumption about the property of the trade mark, which is fundamental in the case of infringement or undue trade mark use by third parties.

Uruguay’s national constitution and specific laws (Nos 9739, 17,616 and 19,857) guarantee copyright and database rights to authors, recognising their intellectual property in the form of their thoughts, creations, scientific works or artistic expressions. The authors have the power to dispose of their intellectual property as they see fit. The legal regulations do not require any formalities or registration to enjoy or exercise copyright, only that the author’s name appears on their creation in order to claim ownership. The authors have the authority to prohibit the use of their creations and receive economic compensation for their use. These kinds of issues are generally resolved on a case-by-case basis, without a common defence.

Although the National Library is responsible for the copyright register, registration is not mandatory. Even without registration, authors can still enjoy and exercise their copyright rights. Additionally, a legal database right is established under Law No 18,331, with Article 37 granting individuals the right to initiate legal proceedings to obtain information about themselves from public or private databases.

Laws That Recognise Image Rights in Uruguay

In Uruguay, there are limited regulations that protect image rights. Law No 9739 of 17 December 1937, which deals with literary and artistic property, regulates image rights in Articles 20 and 21. Similarly, Law No 17011 of 25 September 1998, which pertains to trade marks, also touches on image rights in so far as an image cannot be registered. Article 11 of the Children and Adolescents Code safeguards the privacy and images of minors, prohibiting the harmful use of their images or publication of information that could harm them.

Although a bill has been passed by parliament to regulate commercial exploitation of sports events, including the so-called Sand’s Right, it has yet to be enacted.

How Image Rights Are Protected

The protection of image rights is granted by Articles 20 and 21 of Law No 9739. Article 20 states that photographs, statues, paintings and other artistic forms representing a person belong to the individual they portray, along with the right to reproduce the image, as long as the artwork is made to order and is not the result of a spontaneous work of the artist, and provided authorisation of the person represented has been given. However, the rights to an artwork that is the spontaneous work of the artist belong to the artist.

Article 21 provides that the portrait (image) of a person cannot be marketed without their express consent or, in the case of death, without the express consent of their spouse, children or parents. The person who gave consent has the right to revoke it, but must compensate for any damages incurred by revoking it. Article 21 does not prescribe any formalities for consent, requiring only that it be given expressly. Even verbal consent is valid as long as it is expressed.

However, Article 21 provides exceptions to the requirement of express consent to publish an image. The image may be published without express consent if it is for scientific and didactic purposes and, in general, when it relates to cultural purposes or to facts or events that are of public interest or that have been carried out in public. In these cases, the image (portrait) may be published freely, without the need for express consent.

Transfer or Assignment of the Right to Exploit Image Rights

To exploit an image, the owner of the image rights must expressly grant consent, but there is no requirement for any particular formality or written agreement. In the context of sport, and football in particular, there are three types of image rights to consider.

Collective image rights

These are the image rights of athletes that are reproduced in sports events. Professional athletes typically transfer these image rights to their sports institutions through their employment contracts, even if the transfer is not explicitly written. If they did not transfer these rights, the athletes would be unable to fulfil their obligations under their employment contracts, which involve providing sports services in public sports events.

Image rights linked to the sports institution

The second type is image rights linked to the sports institution. These are image rights that are connected to the sports institution that hired the athlete, such as social responsibility or marketing actions featuring the athlete’s image. Although these rights may be linked to the employment relationship, they are not part of the sporting event and therefore cannot be assumed to be included in the employment contract. Express written agreement is required to assign them.

Image rights of an athlete or public person not linked to the sports institution

The third type is image rights of players as athletes or public figures that are independent of and unrelated to their employment relationship with the sports institution. For example, these would be the image rights associated with commercial contracts that players might enter into with brands or companies, without any link to the club. These rights are not included in the employment contract and therefore require express written consent to assign them to a third party.

It is important to note that there are generally no restrictions on assigning image rights, unless they have already been transferred to third parties.

Currently, there are two cases before national courts where football players and referees are claiming damages against the AUF and Tenfield (the company that owns the television rights) for improper use of their respective images in television broadcasts of matches and other sporting events.

In the Uruguayan jurisdiction, the sports data of spectators is usually used for security and (in some cases) for commercial opportunities, especially regarding clubs that have all the information and data related to their members.

Uruguay recognises the protection of personal data as an inherent human right in Article 72 of its Constitution. Moreover, Law No 18,331 regulates the protection of personal data and the action of habeas data, which is regulated by Decree No 664/2008 and No 414/009.

These rules have subsequently been supplemented by Law No 19,670 and Decree 64/020, which have contributed to further adapting the country’s personal data protection standards to those of the European Union.

The Role of the National Courts in Sport

Although the statutes of sports federations in Uruguay prohibit parties from resorting to national courts (either explicitly or through arbitration clauses included in the statutes), it is not uncommon for individuals to seek the assistance of courts to address sports-related issues. In football, for instance, FIFA allows claims related to the employment relationship to be brought before national labour courts. Claims by agents against players or for damages suffered in sports are also sometimes heard in national courts.

In cases where a sports institution argues that the national court lacks jurisdiction owing to the prohibition established by the federation’s statutes, the national court has sometimes disregarded the prohibition and asserted jurisdiction over the case.

It is important to note that internal dispute resolution mechanisms do not need to be exhausted before national courts can be deemed competent to hear a case.

Jurisdictional Bodies of the Federations

Sports federations typically have their own jurisdictional bodies for handling conflicts among their members. In this sense, the AUF is the most advanced federation, and has a very good judicial system, although there is room for improvement in the selection and training of some of its court members.

The AUF has several courts, as follows.

• The Professional Football Arbitration Tribunal is an independent court that deals with labour disputes involving players, coaches, physical trainers and clubs. It consists of representatives from players’ unions, coaches and physical trainers’ unions (elected by those unions) and representatives from clubs (elected by the AUF). Decisions made by this court are final and cannot be appealed.
• The Dispute Resolution Chamber has the authority to decide economic conflicts between clubs. Its decisions can be appealed to the Appeals Committee.
• The Disciplinary Committee handles disciplinary issues, and its decisions can be appealed to the Appeals Commission.
• The Appeals Commission hears appeals against decisions made by the Dispute Resolution Chamber and the Disciplinary Committee. Its decisions can be appealed to the Chamber of Arbitration for Sport, an independent court that is not part of the AUF. However, since this chamber has not yet been constituted, decisions made by the Appeals Commission can be appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).

Enforceability of Decisions

The decisions of the AUF’s courts on economic matters are primarily enforced by preventing sports institutions from participating in new championships or tournaments.

For example, if a first division club has debts to players, coaches or physical trainers, they cannot participate in a tournament or championship unless they resolve those debts or reach a payment agreement beforehand. If the debts are not resolved by the day before the start of the tournament, the club will automatically be relegated from the division and will also not be able to participate in the second division until they settle their debts; failure to do so will result in relegation to the amateur division.

Regarding debts between clubs, there is a debate about whether the debtor can participate in championships or tournaments. The general consensus is that they can, as there is no express rule prohibiting clubs with debts from taking part in championships or tournaments (the General Regulations of the AUF previously contained such a rule, but it was later removed).

The Employment Relationship Between Athletes and Sports Institutions

The relationship between an athlete and their sports institution can vary greatly depending on the sport. For example, the relationship between a football or basketball player and their club is quite different from that of a boxer, cyclist or tennis player with their respective institutions.

In the case of football, the relationship between the player and the club is considered a special employment relationship – some argue this is governed by labour law, while others argue it falls under a separate sports law. The Player Statute serves as the collective bargaining agreement that regulates the relationship between players and clubs. It outlines the benefits afforded to players and sets minimum salaries based on age and division. For instance, the minimum salary for a football player over the age of 21 who plays in a first division club is currently the equivalent of USD1,500.

Application of Labour Law by the AUF’s Courts

When it comes to labour disputes between football players, coaches, physical trainers and clubs, the Professional Football Arbitration Tribunal – the AUF’s jurisdictional body – generally does not apply labour law in its entirety. Instead, it applies the collective agreements that govern each respective group (Uruguayan Football Player Statute, Coach Statute and Physical Trainer Statute).

The tribunal’s President, who casts the deciding vote in the case of a tie, proceeds on the basis that the principle of autonomy of the will governs the employment relationship between football players and clubs. This is because the rules of sports law apply to these relationships, not labour standards.

As a result, the tribunal does not recognise certain benefits granted by labour law, such as the right to overtime pay, extra month’s salary and holiday pay, in favour of football players, trainers and physical trainers. On the other hand, Article 34 of the Player Statute grants in favour of players 20% of their national or foreign transfer fee.

However, in many cases clubs, or even agents or representatives, require football players to waive this 20% in order to complete the transfer. Some claims have been brought before the tribunal arguing that such a waiver is not valid, given the public policy nature of labour law. However, the court, with the vote of the President, has rejected these claims, maintaining that the principle of autonomy of the will applies, while sports law rather than labour law applies.

Number of Foreign Athletes

While there are no laws that specifically limit the number of foreigners that can compete in sports tournaments, many sports federations have their own regulations in place governing the involvement of foreign athletes.

For instance, the Uruguayan Football Player Statute stipulates that each club may only register a maximum of six foreign players per season, and that no more than three foreign players can be on the field of play at any given time.

In basketball, the Regulations of the Uruguayan Basketball League state that each club is allowed to have two registered foreign players, as well as one foreigner who, after some years playing in Uruguay, has applied to become a Uruguayan citizen.

Esports are rapidly gaining ground in Uruguay, with the creation of the Uruguay Esports Association (AESU) on 28 February 2019. The AESU was established with the goal of improving, promoting and regulating esports in all its forms, while upholding values of sportsmanship, fairness and sustainability.

The AESU is made up of a group of young professionals who share a passion for esports.

Currently, the AESU boasts a total of 15 teams, some more professional than others, competing in various leagues such as the Liga Uruguaya Pubg Mobile, Liga Uruguaya de Free Fire and Liga AESU Clash Royale.

There is also a strong virtual football scene in Uruguay. The Uruguayan Virtual Football Federation organises the Uruguayan Cup, which sees the participation of numerous teams, including professional ones such as Peñarol, Nacional, Wanderers and Atenas Progreso. The Federation also runs the Super League, featuring all the main professional clubs in Uruguay.

Women’s football in Uruguay dates back to 1996, but only in recent years have most clubs started to incorporate it into their organisations. In the past season, 24 teams participated in AUF tournaments, while many others competed in tournaments organised in different regions of the country. It is fair to say that there has also been a significant increase in the number of clubs involved in women’s grassroots football.

This year, the AUF women’s football tournament will be broadcast live for free on AUF TV, featuring pre- and post-match interviews with players. The most representative organisation in Uruguayan football is the Players’ Union (Mutual Uruguaya de Futbolistas Profesionales). Last year, the Union launched its women’s football department, intended to improve and encourage the practice of women’s football by providing the best labour conditions for its players. While most women’s teams are currently amateur, some such as Club Nacional de Football have professional players.

Other women’s sports are also rapidly developing in Uruguay. Women’s basketball, for instance, is seeing growth not only in clubs but also in national teams. Women’s field hockey is also gaining popularity, with the junior national team participating in the last World Championship in South Africa in 2022.

Uruguay has produced several well-known women athletes, including Deborah Rodríguez and María Pía Fernandez, the sailor Dolores Moreira, and boxers Cris Namus and Cecilia Comunales.

Currently, Uruguay does not have specific regulations regarding virtual assets, including non-fungible tokens (NFTs). As these assets are relatively new in the country, there is not yet an experienced market in this regard.

However, recently Uruguay’s national football team signed an agreement with the platform Bitici.com to launch its own tokens and NFTs. These kinds of assets present a good opportunity for providing financial support to sports institutions.

It is crucial to seek legal advice, especially related to consumer law, before deciding to use these assets, in order to avoid potential risks.

There is no applicable information for this jurisdiction.

There is no applicable information for this jurisdiction.

There is no applicable information for this jurisdiction.