In the recent past, the number of parties and counsel expressing their disagreement with the "double hat" arbitrator/counsel role of the CAS members has increased. Although in 2006 ICAS issued a recommendation advising CAS arbitrators to avoid a "double hat" situation, matters did not change significantly. Therefore, ICAS had to go one step further and consider revising the CAS regulations. The prohibition of the "double hat" arbitrator/counsel role is aimed at limiting the risk of conflicts of interest and at reducing the number of petitions for challenge during arbitrations.

The issue dates back to a decision of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court in 2006 (4P.105/2006) which prompted the 2006 recommendation. In these proceedings, the appellant had challenged a decision of the CAS on the grounds of lack of independence of an arbitrator. According to the appellant, the lack of independence resulted from the fact that the counterparty was represented by a lawyer who had, in parallel, sat on a CAS tribunal together with one of the arbitrators in the present case. The Swiss Federal Supreme Court held that the fact of an arbitrator and counsel of the opposing side acting together as arbitrators in another case was not sufficient to show a lack of independence.

The other amendments to the CAS regulations are related to procedural issues. ICAS also appointed nine new CAS arbitrators, and confirmed the creation of two new arbitration divisions in 2010, one in connection with the Olympic Winter Games in Vancouver and the other in connection with the Commonwealth Games in New Delhi. In addition, ICAS is considering establishing rules on an ad hoc procedure for the FIFA World Cup in South Africa.