The case involves Melanie Rinaldi, a Canadian-Portuguese elite diver, who sought to change her sports nationality from Canada to Portugal under the regulations of the Fédération Internationale de Natation (FINA). The dispute centered on FINA General Rule (GR) 2.6, which mandates that an athlete must reside in the new country for at least 12 months before changing national affiliation. Rinaldi, who held dual citizenship, argued that her familial ties to Portugal and her acquisition of Portuguese citizenship justified the change. However, she had not physically resided in Portugal for the required period, as she continued to train and compete primarily in the United States and Canada.
FINA rejected her request, emphasizing that GR 2.6’s residency requirement was clear and aimed to prevent "nation shopping" by ensuring athletes genuinely establish their center of life in the new country. Rinaldi appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), contending that the term "resided" should be interpreted flexibly to include cumulative stays demonstrating genuine attachment, rather than continuous physical presence. The sole arbitrator, Quentin Byrne-Sutton, upheld FINA’s decision, ruling that the term "resided" unambiguously required stable, uninterrupted residence. The arbitrator found that Rinaldi’s sporadic visits to Portugal did not meet this criterion, as she maintained her training base in Miami and participated in Canadian national championships.
The decision underscored that the 12-month residency rule was a reasonable and objective condition to preserve the integrity of national representation in sports, preventing athletes from switching affiliations for convenience. The arbitrator also noted that the rule did not violate Swiss law principles of personality rights or equality, as it applied uniformly and without discrimination. While the ruling acknowledged Rinaldi’s emotional and familial ties to Portugal, it concluded that her lack of physical residency disqualified her from changing her sports nationality under FINA’s rules.
The case highlighted the tension between an athlete’s personal connections to a country and the regulatory framework designed to maintain fairness in international sports. The arbitrator emphasized the importance of clear, objective criteria in sports governance to uphold the spirit of competition and prevent exploitation of national affiliations. Despite the compelling human aspects of Rinaldi’s situation, the CAS dismissed her appeal, reinforcing the principle of equal treatment under established rules. The outcome affirmed the necessity of strict adherence to residency requirements, even in cases involving strong transnational ties.