Bar & Bench News Network
Attorney General Goolam Vahanvati has provided legal support to the BCCI's stand regarding the "whereabouts" clause in World Anti-Doping Agency's Anti-doping Code. The clause in question requires players to inform the ICC of their whereabouts at all times and make themselves available for out-of-competition testing. The Attorney General, in an opinion submitted to BCCI President Shashank Manohar, stated that the "whereabouts" clause of the Code is infringing on the players' privacy and can be subject to a constitutional challenge since the right to privacy has been read by the courts into Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
The BCCI had earlier requested former Chief Justice A S. Anand and Mr. Vahanvathi to opine on the controversial clause. The BCCI has so far opposed the code, on the grounds that the clause is unnecessary, intrusive and in violation of the right to privacy. So far, eleven cricketers have opposed Clause 14 and have bypassed the August 1 deadline to provide information regarding their whereabouts to the ICC.
The Indian National Anti-doping Agency is a signatory to the Code, as is the Indian Olympics Committee. The BCCI was seeking advice on the legal implications and international repercussions of its refusal to become a signatory to the Code.
David Becker and Iain Higgins, the ICC's legal experts, are advising on the ramifications of the Code. Iain Higgins was in Mumbai early last month to address the BCCI's concerns regarding the Code. Iain Higgins was formerly an associate with Bird & Bird's sports practice and has since joined the ICC as its Company Lawyer. Pending resolution, ICC has announced that it will convene a working group on the 5th and 6th of September to discuss BCCI's objections. The Attorney General's opinion has strengthened the BCCI's call for a special Code for cricketers.
Former Chief Justice Anand and Attorney General Goolam Vahanvathi
Vs.
Iain Higgins and David Becker

|
Be the first to post a comment 
Related Stories
- Conversation with Attorney General of India, Goolam E Vahanvati
- Conversation with Attorney General of India, Goolam E Vahanvati
- "Judges have nothing to fear, nothing to hide" says Justice D.V. Shylendra Kumar
- Chief Justice rebukes Justice Shylendra Kumar
- Anand & Anand notches yet another copyright victory for T-Series
- Anand & Anand secure GI certificate for Tirumala Laddu
- SC allows contempt plea by Salve; Prashant Bhushan faces contempt; calls for impeachment of Justice Dinakaran
Other News
- Re-Upped Round up May 21
- Clasis Law moves to a larger office space in Delhi
- Re-Upped Round up May 18
- SC to hear petition challenging appointment of sitting AP High Court judge; Petition alleges deliberate concealment of pending criminal investigation at the time of enrollment
- Linklaters Managing Associate Pranav Sharma to rejoin Amarchand Mangaldas as Partner
- Re-Upped Round up May 17
- Recruitment Tracker: Luthra top recruiter followed by Amarchand and AZB for NALSAR Class of 2012
The Viewpoint: Indemnification Provisions - Is the fight on the indemnity clause worth the effort?
May 17, 2012 | Bar & Bench brings to you the twentieth article on 'The Viewpoint' series with its Knowledge Partner AZB & Partners. AZB Senior Associate Nandish Vyas and Associate Pranati Ishwar in this article seek to examine the context in which indemnification rights are relevant for acquisition transactions, and also seek to explore if there are areas where they are potentially not worth the comments (4)










