Introduction

Long before the Lisbon Treaty, when the European Union had no competence to make policy decisions in the field of sport, EU law had a huge impact on sport where EU competences and sport overlap. This is particularly the case when economics is involved, be it media rights, competition law, state aid, the environment and, most often, internal market regulations such as freedom of movement, freedom to provide service and freedom of establishment.

Important ECJ rulings on sport

a. Walgrave and Koch C-36/74 - Discrimination/ national teams
EU Law does not apply to national teams- i.e. the French national team does not discriminate by only allowing French players to play in it.

b. Bosman C-415/93 - Free movement of workers
ECJ ruled that footballing transfer rules impeded free movement of workers, thereafter allowing players whose contract had expired to change clubs without a transfer fee being paid.

c. Deliege C-51/96 - Free provision of services
A Belgian judoka failed to be selected for the national team and claimed that this infringed her rights to provide a service. The Court found that, although selection rules inevitably have the effect of limiting the number of participants in a tournament, this is inherent in the conduct of international sports.

d. Lehtonen C176/96 - Transfer deadlines
A Finish basketball player was not allowed to play in Belgian competition as his transfer occurred after the deadline set by the Belgian league. The ECJ ruled that the rules did impinge on free movement of workers. However, the Court went on to state that this may be justified on non-economic grounds - the setting of transfer deadlines may be intended to avoid distortion of competitions - if it does not go beyond what is necessary for achieving that aim. It is for the national court to ascertain whether that last condition is satisfied.

e. Simutenkov C-265/03 - Non-discrimination of third country nationals
A Russian player playing in the Spanish League won a case against Spanish football against quotas of non-EU players in domestic competition as this discriminated against third country nationals. Russia, while being a non-EU state, has a partnership agreement with the EU.

f. Meca-Medina C-519/04 - Competition/anti-doping
Two swimmers appealed against a drugs ban claiming that the ban impinged their competition rights. While the ECJ agreed with the Court of First Instance that these sporting rules fell outside the remit of the Treaty and the swimmers were not allowed to compete, this ruling was generally considered bad for sport as the ECJ ruled that sporting activity in general could not be considered to fall outside the Treaty’s remit. It meant the specificity of sport must be ruled on on a case-by-case basis.

g. Murphy C-403/08 & C-429/08- free provision of goods
These cases involved a UK pub landlady, Karen Murphy, who had bought a Greek satellite decoder card and showed a Greek broadcast of Premiership matches in her pub. The Premier League argued that this was in breach of their licencing arrangements, while Murphy argued that she was free to do so under internal market legislation on the free provision of goods and services across EU member states. The entire judgment has to be reconsidered by the UK Court in due course before a final decision is reached.

Whilst the judgement was seen as a victory for Murphy and the consumer in certain sections of the press, much of the ruling went the Premier League’s way. The ruling said that showing matches in a pub is a ‘communication to the public’ in which certain elements of the broadcast require authorisation of the rights holder, such that the transmission of logos or instant replays would infringe copyright. The case is referred back to the UK courts and it may take some time before the ruling’s consequences are established.
 

For more information contact David Foster.

Download brief (pdf)