The case involves Canadian equestrian rider Karen Pavicic, who filed an application with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) Ad Hoc Division against the Fédération Équestre Internationale (FEI) over a decision by the FEI Dressage Committee. Pavicic alleged that a judge, Elizabeth McMullen, had unfairly inflated scores for another rider, Megan Lane, during a qualifying event for the 2016 Rio Olympics, securing Lane’s qualification over Pavicic. The FEI Dressage Committee reviewed the matter but upheld the original results, citing insufficient grounds to alter them, though it agreed to investigate McMullen’s conduct further. Pavicic appealed directly to CAS without first exhausting internal remedies by appealing to the FEI Tribunal, as required by FEI regulations. The CAS Ad Hoc Rules allow exceptions in urgent cases where internal appeals would render the process ineffective, but the sole arbitrator, Mark Hovell, found that Pavicic’s two-week delay in filing her appeal after the FEI decision meant the urgency was self-created. The FEI argued that CAS lacked jurisdiction because Pavicic failed to exhaust internal remedies and because the decision predated the CAS Ad Hoc Division’s jurisdiction period, which begins ten days before the Olympics. The arbitrator agreed, ruling the appeal inadmissible due to lack of jurisdiction. The case underscores the importance of following procedural requirements, including exhausting internal remedies before seeking external arbitration, unless urgency justifies bypassing them. The arbitrator emphasized that Pavicic could have acted sooner, and her delay undermined her claim of urgency. The decision highlights CAS’s role in enforcing procedural fairness while maintaining the integrity of sports arbitration processes. The dispute also examined Article 61.2 of the Olympic Charter, which mandates that Olympic-related disputes be submitted exclusively to CAS. The FEI contested jurisdiction based on the 10-day rule and the non-exhaustion of internal remedies. The arbitrator noted that Pavicic had two weeks to appeal to the FEI Tribunal but chose not to, creating her own urgency. While parties could agree to bypass internal remedies, there was no evidence Pavicic discussed this with the FEI. Ultimately, the CAS Ad Hoc Division ruled it had no jurisdiction over Pavicic’s August 2, 2016, application and dismissed all other relief requests. The case serves as a reminder of the critical need for athletes to adhere to procedural rules in sports arbitration.