The case involves Fenerbahçe SK, a Turkish football club, appealing against UEFA sanctions imposed after incidents during a 2012/2013 European League match. The initial sanctions included playing a match behind closed doors, a deferred two-year probationary exclusion from future UEFA competitions, and a €60,000 fine. Fenerbahçe appealed to the UEFA Appeals Body, which upheld the sanctions, prompting the club to file an appeal with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) and request a stay of the deferred exclusion sanction. The CAS confirmed its jurisdiction under Swiss Private International Law and UEFA statutes, as well as the admissibility of the appeal, which was filed within the required ten-day deadline. The central legal issue was whether Fenerbahçe would suffer irreparable harm if the stay was not granted. The CAS Deputy President evaluated three criteria for provisional measures: irreparable harm, likelihood of success on the merits, and a balance of interests. Fenerbahçe argued that the deferred sanction risked reputational and financial damage if a future disciplinary incident occurred, even if beyond their control. However, the CAS found this argument unconvincing, ruling that a hypothetical sanction deferred for probation could not constitute irreparable harm. The decision emphasized that financial or reputational harm, being compensable, did not meet the irreparable harm threshold. Consequently, the request for a stay was denied, as the conditions for provisional relief were not met. The order clarified that this procedural decision could not be challenged under Swiss law and concluded without addressing other procedural criteria for efficiency. The ruling reaffirmed the principle that compensable harm, such as financial or reputational damage, does not qualify as irreparable harm warranting a stay of sanctions. The decision underscores that sanctions must be immediate and non-speculative to justify interim measures.