Doping is not a criminal offence in Ireland. Sport Ireland is the National Anti-Doping Organisation and applies the WADA code as such. It also provides testing facilities to other sporting bodies, such as in competitions organised by those bodies where games are in Ireland. Reports detailing the number and nature of tests, and notable cases, are published annually.

The amount of testing is not evenly distributed. Cycling and rugby tend to test the most, with the GAA having a large absolute number of tests but a lower number relative to participation numbers. Underage testing is limited, with some sports carrying out no such testing.

There is no specifically sport-related legislation dealing with sporting integrity offences. Match-fixing or fraud would likely be dealt with as offences of dishonesty by the criminal justice system, but where the athlete engaged in such is not making personal gain, it would be usually left to the sport itself to deal with the matters under its own disciplinary systems.

An exception would be where there are integrity offences in a sporting body off-field, such as at the board level. Here, in cases where the sports body is an incorporated body, the companies regulator has dealt with issues of integrity and failings of governance as part of the regulation of corporate bodies. For example, the Football Association of Ireland has had significant issues in recent years arising out of failures to comply with companies legislation.

Betting is legal, and while regulated, problem gambling on sport is seen as being a societal problem, particularly given the manner in which online gambling has increased the ease of gambling. There is therefore a strong push to increase the extent and intensity of regulation of gambling.

As a result, the Gambling Regulation Act 2024, which has had a long and involved legislative history, has now been passed. The Gambling Regulation Authority of Ireland has been set up, which has considerable powers in relation to licensing and regulation of gambling, as well as wide-ranging restrictions on advertising and inducements to gamble, such as free offers or free hospitality. Sponsorship would also be restricted, particularly in relation to events or bodies that appeal to or include children; the effect of this on sports clubs and sports bodies would be immediately clear.

The Gambling Regulation Authority is still in the process of recruiting staff, and naturally it remains to be seen how it will operate in practice. However, this is a significant change and will be an area to be watched.

Most sporting bodies have generally similar disciplinary systems in respect of doping, betting and integrity offences. The WADA code can be taken as the de facto basis for doping offences, while betting and integrity offences will be dealt with under the individual sporting system, but in broadly similar manners. As a rule, those caught in such will be suspended. However, particularly on the gambling side, it may be treated as much as an addiction issue with help to be provided as a disciplinary matter.

Irish law in the wider context is very strong on the requirements for fair procedure, and the requirements for natural and Constitutional justice – specifically, the right to put one’s own case and the right for an unbiased assessor – will be implied into any hearings in relation to integrity issues.

As an EU jurisdiction, Ireland is naturally affected by the recent developments in sports law in EU law. The possible effects on sports arbitration and especially disciplinary arbitration of Advocate General Capeta’s opinion in Royal Football Club Seraing (Case C-600/23) are, at the time of writing, still very much to be seen.

Rights-holders generally restrict the resale of tickets above face value as part of the terms and conditions of entry into sporting events. Reselling tickets at above face value – ticket-touting – was made a criminal offence in 2021. However, there have been no prosecutions to date. Rights-holders have used Norwich Pharmacal orders to prevent the resale of tickets for above face value, and have cancelled tickets sold in this manner outside of the terms and conditions of the tickets. There is a general shift to rights-holders in major sports using ticket sales management providers like Ticketmaster to control the sale and resale of tickets for them, with the advantages in reduced load on the rights-holders.

What one must note at the outset is that Ireland is a smaller market next door to, and very integrated with, the sponsorship behemoth that is the Premier League. The sports sponsorship market is distorted by the way the weight of this drags attention to itself every bit as much as the subscription sports broadcast market is.

That noted, sponsorship of sports is very prevalent in Ireland, and the range of brands seeking sponsorship opportunities is very wide, with prominent examples including banks, insurance companies, telecommunications firms, supermarket chains and agrifood industries.

Given the prominence of the GAA, and the strong links with local counties in the structure of the GAA, prominent local brands and local teams often link up together, with it being a means for local companies both to engage with their locale and to push their brand to a wider audience on the island. At the next level up, more prominent counties, and provincial or representative teams in other sports, often associate with larger brands to push a more top-down or island-wide branding. Stadium naming deals are common and increasingly popular.

There is no hard-and-fast rule about who makes the first approach, the rights-holder or the sponsor, but it would generally be done by the commercial departments of the rights-holders reaching out with proposals to potential sponsors identified by them in advance. The sharing of data as part of the pitch in these contacts would now be taken almost as read; certainly, any sports fan interacting with a team would be well aware of the data processing notices and cookie notices that follow them as a matter of course, stating that the data can be shared with partners.

There is no direct equivalent of the Loi Évin in France, and sponsorship by alcohol manufacturers occurs. However, this sponsorship is also used to market new products more appropriate for an athletic lifestyle, such as low or zero alcohol.

Sports broadcasting revenue by domestic public-service broadcasters (which includes the Irish language channel) is largely based on advertising sales. There are other players in the market which are subscription channels, with rights-holders often selling rights to these channels instead.

The primary domestic rights would be the GAA’s All-Ireland championships in football and hurling. The GAA had entered into mixed rights sales where games are shared between the subscription-only broadcaster Sky and domestic free-to-air broadcasters, but this was not renewed. The GAA has instead shifted to a streaming service it had set up as a joint venture with the main public service broadcaster, with a subscription element for premium games. This has, however, attracted the attention of the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (CCPC), the Irish competition authority, over a potential lessening of competition in the broadcast market; the outcome remains to be seen.

Rugby is, at professional level, largely part of wider broadcast-rights deals, such as with the URC, European rugby or the sales of Six Nations and other test-rugby rights. These would then be resold on the Irish market. The different elements of the season are often broken up and sold to different bidders; for example, the test series usually played in November has recently been sold to TNT, while the rights to live Six Nations games are shared among domestic free-to-air channels. Notably, some of the major professional rugby teams, led by Munster, have started developing their own subscription channel as a means of increasing fan engagement and revenue.

Broadcasting is subject to the same restrictions common in the EU, that is, that certain category-A events must be live on free-to-air channels. There are perennial attempts to expand this list, often under domestic political pressure, and staunchly resisted by the rights-holders.

A noticeable development at sub-elite level is how many clubs in different sports have set up streaming services where their matches can now be watched on YouTube or other platforms. Although still in its infancy, this is an area where rapid expansion and commercialisation would seem to be likely, with the difficulties and opportunities that follow.

The rights in a sports event are treated as rights in property in the normal manner one would expect in the common law world, and left to the rights-holder to organise on the basis of contract with those participating, those attending (as contractual licensees) and those broadcasting the events.

Consumer protection rights, competition law and general contract law apply as one would expect and in the same manner, but with some special qualifications imposed by EU law, such as in broadcasting. As always, one must note the complexity of Irish sport often operating cross-border with all that that entails.

Ireland is a common law country, and the law on the duty of care is largely the same as that in England and Wales.

There is a strong push both from the courts and the legislature to protect sport from the perceived chilling effect of personal injuries litigation. Recent case law has repeatedly stressed the need for consideration of the social utility of sport, which must be considered as a counterweight when the court is considering whether liability should be imposed. As a result, the Civil Liability (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2011, increased the threshold required to sue volunteers – that is, those operating for expenses only, including in sport – to that of gross negligence, unless a motor vehicle is concerned or the volunteer knew they were ignoring the directions of the governing body. For organisers, which would include governing bodies, the courts are required to consider social utility as a factor before imposing any liability.

More recently, the Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2023 has amended the Occupiers Liability Act to make it more difficult for those lawfully on a premises to sue the occupier of those premises in negligence for damage caused by the state of those premises. This would include those on sports pitches or in sports clubs, and was in part driven by difficulties in insuring sports premises.

The idea is that reducing the legal exposure, whether it be of volunteers of occupiers of premises, to risk, will lead to a reduction in insurance premium prices. However, given that no such reduction followed the reduction in risk exposure in the 2011 Act, it must remain very much open to question whether expanding the areas where barriers to litigation are put up will actually work as intended.

Personal injury claims cannot be excluded, as a matter of public policy.

In the wider context, there is not a notable history of hooliganism or violent disorder at sports events, and normal policing generally suffices. There have been cases of violence against players and referees, both by other players and by supporters. It would be increasingly common that these are dealt with as criminal offences and tried as such. This has included prison sentences being given for those convicted of such offences.

Sporting bodies in Ireland vary in structure. As a general trend, the higher up the sporting pyramid a body is, the more likely it is to have a separate legal personality, such as a limited liability company or a company limited by guarantee. At the grassroots level, clubs are often unincorporated bodies with a trustee structure. This can lead to difficulties, with club members of unincorporated clubs unable to sue the club of which they are members. The Law Reform Commission has made proposals that all unincorporated bodies should have to shift to incorporated form, but over a year after these proposals were first made, there is neither change nor progress.

Sport Ireland has a Governance Code of Sport under the wider National Sports Policy of the Irish government, with which all bodies operating under the aegis of Sport Ireland must comply. Sport Ireland operates a compliance register where bodies certify their compliance, subject to review on renewal. Compliance is a necessary condition for funding from Sport Ireland, and is therefore, in practical terms, universal and mandatory; no sporting body can afford to miss out on this support in what is a small market where bodies are often competing on an international scale against far bigger and better-funded entities.

For any limited liability or incorporated body, the general restrictions of companies law apply to directors and officers in the same manner that they would with any other company, and these should be checked with the companies regulator. Within this, other sports operate their own governance requirements. As many of the major players in major Irish sporting codes are closer to representative sub-units feeding into the larger national governing body, those who may find themselves in financial difficulty are more likely to find the head body intervening to stabilise financial failures than imposing points deductions on independent economic actors. The varied nature of the differing bodies means it would be prudent for anyone advising or dealing with the matter to consult the policies of the individual sport.

The Irish state remains one of the largest funders of grassroots sport; albeit at insufficient levels, most of this support goes through governing bodies, as well as support for Olympic athletes.

Funding of the largest sports is heavily dependent on broadcasting deals, although the EU’s regulations on free-to-air access for major events applies. Sponsorship is also a major source of funding in these major sports, with higher-profile sports, like rugby and the GAA, dominating the funding and sponsorship markets, to the extent that less-prominent sports often operate hand-to-mouth.

The most noteworthy development is the investment of CVC, the private equity fund, in rugby, acquiring stakes in the Six Nations, the URC and the EPCR. The former two, though remaining registered as Irish companies, have now moved much of their effective running out of the jurisdiction. It is unclear whether this is related to Brexit and seeking to move outside of an EU legal system.

Another strong trend is individual benefactors supporting their preferred team. This has had profound effects in the nominally-amateur GAA, with a marked resultant disparity in resources having on-field results.

However, this has been the subject of a recent and ongoing development, where the Revenue Commissioners, the Irish tax authorities, are engaged in investigation of various GAA counties (the rough equivalent in terms of level of clubs in most professional sports) in terms of expenses paid but not declared as income. Although it remains to be seen how this will fall out, it could have wider implications for other sports, with examples such as ex gratia payments to officials above and beyond vouched expenses.

The relatively successful Paris 2024 Olympics has led to calls for increased funding of sport, and this seems likely to become more of a political priority.

Intellectual property in Ireland is protected in the same manner as in other EU states, operating under the same general EU provisions.

No response given for this section.

No response given for this section.

No response given for this section.

Data in sports has become mainstream as much through the activities of newer media voices as through professionals. There is now huge generation and use of sports data, not just in traditionally data-heavy sports such as cycling but also in relation to the major field sports.

Although there is an appreciation of the importance of data, there must be some doubts about whether all of the data being collected is being used in the most efficient manner; the ability properly to use data requires considerable upskilling by sporting bodies, and this could be a key point of competitive advantage if proper investment were made.

Veterinary data in terms of the huge bloodstock and racing industry is often unremarked, but is a critical feature of possibly the largest sporting industry on the island. Manipulation of and access to this data, and possible misuse in relation to betting, is obviously a key fear, and protection of this data is critical.

The GDPR applies fully in Ireland, and all sports must have GDPR policies in place. This is particularly acute given the manner in which domestic sporting events can leave Ireland and cross into the UK in, for example, club cycling events at the border with Northern Ireland.

The Irish courts are extremely reluctant to intervene in sporting disputes if it can be avoided, with a strong and consistent line of case law emphasising this. There is no specific requirement that internal remedies must be exhausted before approaching the courts, but the courts have made it clear in past argument that where the option of internal remedies is open, then parties will be directed to them by the courts as the preferred option. There are some exceptional cases – for example, where questions of Constitutional or EU law arise, then it is much more likely that the courts would accept it is a matter for them rather than the agreed internal mechanisms, and some commercial arrangements would be viewed in a similar light – but it would be wise always to assume that the courts will urge parties towards internal or specifically sporting dispute resolution as the first port of call.

ADR, and especially mediation, is a fast-growing area of the law. In sports dispute resolution, it is well established, with the GAA’s Dispute Resolution Authority establishing arbitration as its highest level of appeal in terms, and with Sports Dispute Solutions Ireland having been established with Sport Ireland to provide domestic arbitration and mediation to most other Irish sports.

The majority of Olympic sports would participate in the CAS system; the notable exception is rugby where, barring doping, it very much manages its own affairs. The GAA would be even more stark in this regard.

As noted above, the full effect of EU law on CAS arbitration would also affect Ireland. The major recent development has been the effective EU onshoring of UEFA arbitrations before CAS, with Dublin now available as an option as the seat of such arbitrations. The potential effects of the Seraing case on top of ISU could push this trend even further.

The powers of sports governing bodies derive from contract and the agreement to be bound by the rules of the relevant association. The courts are generally deferential to this, preferring, as noted, to leave matters to internal mechanisms and operating a supervisory jurisdiction over those internal mechanisms rather than directly dealing with matters themselves. Once there is compliance with these general restrictions, such as the requirements of natural and Constitutional justice and the rules of the sporting body itself, the courts are reluctant to intervene.

For those bodies whose rules permit access to CAS, this remains an option. However, the recent ISU decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) would be of obvious relevance and, as noted above, the Seraing case, and the full extent of how this will play out, remains to be seen.

It should be noted that the provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights are not directly applicable in Ireland, which has a strong dualist legal system. The provisions of the ECHR are given some domestic effect by way of the ECHR Act 2003, but apply only to the conduct of state bodies, rather than the private contractual agreements that characterise sporting structures.

Some bodies, such as Sport Ireland, would have statutory duties under the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission Act 2014, analogous to the public sector equality duty under the Equality Act 2010. However, as always given the multi-jurisdictional nature of sport in Ireland, it would be advisable to take specialist advice if it is felt that this would be appropriate.

There is an increasing trend in the larger sporting bodies for player representative bodies, such as the Gaelic Players Association or the Irish Rugby Players Association, to have a voice. These bodies can often act as stakeholders and athlete voices in negotiations such as in those concerning standard-form player contracts. However, instances where this has become antagonistic have cropped up.

Salary caps are not a feature of Irish sport; indeed, the dominant cultural force in Irish sport, the Gaelic Athletic Association, remains nominally amateur. In terms of professional sports, football contracts are regulated by the Football Association of Ireland very much according to the normal FIFA models. Rugby, an all-island professional sport, has a more complicated structure, with all players nominally being employed by the IRFU through its provincial teams, with some players for the national team being on true central contracts. The overwhelming dominance of the IRFU in this market and the influence of its restrictions on non-Irish qualified players has not been the focus of much attention but, as with the French JIFF, some elements may come under increasing scrutiny after recent European case law.

The general elements of Irish employment law (and, as one of the major sources of this, EU employment law) will apply to sports governing bodies. Very recent decisions of the Irish Supreme Court as to who is an employee, relating to gig employment of those in the fast-food delivery industry, are still washing through the system, but it would seem a reasonable baseline assumption that the number of those covered by employment law as employees will increase rather than shrink.

In the narrower context, the Irish sports market is perhaps unusual in that it is dominated above all by the Gaelic field sports, hurling and Gaelic football, where players are not permitted to be paid. The professional sports field is therefore largely left to three sports: rugby, dominated in an unusual arrangement by the national governing body discussed below; football, where the professional league is small and with consequently limited earning power for players, meaning that it has historically operated as a feeder system to the English game; and, to some extent outside of the normal loop, horse racing with its unique arrangements dealing with enormous amounts of money.

The result of this is that employer/employee disputes are less frequent than might reasonably be expected. However, analogous disputes between player associations and governing bodies are not infrequent, especially in the GAA, where increased demands on players as they move to semi-professional demands means that the allocation of income in terms of supports and resources has become more fraught.

UK nationals have full rights of residence. EU nationals (and those covered by Kolpak) would have full Treaty rights. Nationals of other states may require specific work permits on their immigration permissions (often colloquially referred to in Irish immigration law as “Stamp 4”). Irish immigration law can be complex, and can further be complicated by the fact that, although Ireland is in the EU, it is not in the Schengen System, adding a further layer of complication for those who may need visas to enter and work in the EU if they must then enter Schengen states while working as professional sports persons.

There is free movement on the island of Ireland, and there is a Free Travel Area for UK and Irish citizens moving between Britain and Ireland. However, those athletes travelling may need to check visa restrictions if travelling to Britain rather than Northern Ireland.

As noted above, CJEU case law on the UEFA homegrown players rule, and similar restrictions are relevant to the free movement of athletes, and the full effects of this remain to be seen.

Women’s sport is undoubtedly the key development market in Irish sport. Women’s Gaelic games, especially Gaelic football, has become a very visible feature of the sporting landscape, but other teams, such as the Irish Women’s football team, have equally become much more visible, arguably in the latter case doing better than the men’s team with the visibility that follows.

However, resources are a key limiting factor. For example, the previously successful Irish women’s rugby team lost out in the sudden surge towards full professionalism in the international women’s game, with controversy over lack of proper resources and support equivalent to that given to the men’s team, leading to considerable difficulties and loss of players, and the resignation of coaching staff.

It is fair to say that women’s sport generally is not equally funded, and that there is awareness of this as an issue.

There have been developments in this regard. The Women’s Six Nations rugby tournament has been decoupled from that of the men to be a standalone, and efforts to market this as outreach to new fans and players seem to be successful. The presence of the Irish women’s team at the Olympics Sevens tournament was a notable step forward.

In Gaelic games, the formerly hived-off women’s games are being amalgamated into one shared body where all will have an equal say, although this remains a fraught and slow process. Football, of the three main field sport associations, appears to be having the most high-profile successes with a new management team bringing positivity back to the game. Smaller, often Olympic, sports, such as rowing, sailing, hockey and athletics appear to be achieving considerable returns with little fuss, and are noticeably pushing female engagement.

However, despite some very high-profile sponsorships, such as that of Ladies Gaelic Football by one of the major supermarket chains, the commercial exploitation of this as a driver of revenue is still underdeveloped. Although streaming and YouTube broadcasts are now as commonplace as in any sport, the major sponsorship and broadcast revenue deals are still much more in the three main male field sports associations. The increased exposure of an Olympic year could, if used properly, be a catalyst to change this and build the critical mass of interest that would make commercialisation viable.

As noted above, the governance changes requiring much more equal representation on the boards of national governing bodies and other sporting bodies are recent and to some extent bedding in, but it is to be expected that cultural shifts as a result of this may accelerate processes further.

Esports have not yet been a significant feature of the Irish domestic market, although esports firms maintain a presence in Ireland, availing of the wider tech infrastructure. The esports industry would up to now have been approached very much in the global rather than the domestic context. However, a new National E-Sports Centre was opened in March of 2025. How this new infrastructure will affect the market remains to be seen.

These do not feature as a notable part of the Irish sports law market.

Although AI is becoming all-pervasive, it is still in its infancy in the Irish context. Notably, many sporting bodies do seem to be availing of it for the generation of social media marketing imagery.

However, there are few specifically local developments in sport per se. It would be expected that those developments which are seen elsewhere, particularly in the European sporting market, would be rapidly adopted given that Ireland has a large, influential, tech sector to provide the skillset and push.

The increasing EU steps towards creating a regulatory framework for AI will also be of relevance, and will apply in Ireland.

No response given for this section.