In the Spring 2003 issue of Entertainment Law Ken Foster 1 wrote of the distinction between ‘international sports law’ and ‘global sports law’, with the latter connoting immunity from national law that ‘international sports law’ does not purport to possess. In his introduction to that article, Foster wrote briefly of the litigation between the International Amateur Athletic Federation (hereafter IAAF) and Harry (‘Butch’) Reynolds, the American track athlete who failed an IAAF doping test in the early 1990s and was banned as a consequence. Foster used that case as an example of governing bodies’ response to the possibility of the ‘ordinary’ courts intervening in their disciplinary processes, citing the words of IAAF luminary Arne Ljundqvist. In the course of the litigation Ljundqvist famously stated that ‘the Courts create a lot of problems for our anti-doping work, but we don’t care in the least what they say. We have our rules and they are supreme.
How to Cite:
McArdle, D. (2003). Reflections on the Harry Reynolds Litigation. The Entertainment and Sports Law Journal, 2(2), 6. DOI: http://doi.org/10.16997/eslj.141