The Luis Suarez biting affair: appeal process and wider legal implications
By Tom Dane
On Tuesday 24 June 2014, during Uruguay’s last group match against Italy, Luis Suarez was involved in an incident with Italian defender Giorgio Chiellini, which led to immediate allegations that Suarez had bitten Chiellini on his shoulder.
Incidents of biting on the pitch by Suarez are not new. He was found guilty of biting an opponent while playing for Ajax in the Dutch league in 2010 and also more recently of biting Chelsea defender Branislav Ivanovic while playing for Liverpool in 2013.
The FIFA Disciplinary Committee promptly charged Suarez with misconduct and Suarez had a limited window to respond in writing to the charges. The need to move quickly was to ensure the panel reached a decision before Uruguay’s next World Cup match so that any suspension took effect in the current competition…
Click on the link below to read the rest of the Nabarro briefing.
Sign in or Register to continue reading this article
It's quick, easy and free!
It takes just 5 minutes to register. Answer a few simple questions and once completed you’ll have instant access.Register now
Why register to The Lawyer
In-depth, expert analysis into the stories behind the headlines from our leading team of journalists.
Identify the major players and business opportunities within a particular region through our series of free, special reports.
Receive your pick of The Lawyer's daily and weekly email newsletters, tailored by practice area, region and job function.
More relevant to you
To continue providing the best analysis, insight and news across the legal market we are collecting some information about who you are, what you do and where you work to improve The Lawyer and make it more relevant to you.
News from The Lawyer
Analysis from The Lawyer
Nabarro senior partner and self-confessed “IT geek” Graham Stedman is heralding a major set of investments in technology ahead of the firm’s move to 125 London Wall this year.
Clients are more willing to bring claims against professional service providers but the risk to defendants is not as dramatic as it might seem