Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Sport as Culture in EC Law

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
European Sports Law

Part of the book series: ASSER International Sports Law Series ((ASSER))

Abstract

My approach in this paper will be to inquire into aspects of the business of sport that are treated as different from ‘normal’ businesses; to inquire what legal devices reflect these special characteristics; and then to consider whether the distinct treatment is justified, which will involve not only consideration of the peculiar economic context of organized sport but also some assessment of the perceived ‘cultural quality’ of sport. Are sport’s cultural properties being burned off by commercial growth?

First published in R. Craufurd Smith, ed., Culture in European Union Law (Oxford University Press 2004) Ch. 4, pp. 113–152.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Case 36/74, Walrave and Koch v. Union Cycliste Internationale, [1974] ECR 1405.

  2. 2.

    Case 13/76, Donà v. Mantero, [1976] ECR 1333.

  3. 3.

    Case C-415/93, Union Royale Belge des Sociétés de Football Association ASBL v. Jean-Marc Bosman, [1995] ECR I-4921.

  4. 4.

    For economic analysis, see, e.g., Cairns, Jennett and Sloane 1986, 3; Quirk and Fort 1997; Dobson and Goddard 2001; Rosen and Sanderson 2001, F47; Buzzacchi, Szymanski and Valletti 2003, 167. The home page of Stefan Szymanski is a rich mine: www.ms.ic.ac.uk/stefan.

  5. 5.

    On rules precluding multiple ownership of clubs, see the decision based on EC and Swiss law of the Court for Arbitration in Sport (CAS), an arbitral body established by the industry and based in Lausanne, in CAS 98/200, AEK Athens and Sparta Prague v. UEFA, 20 August 1999. The Commission subsequently chose to treat this as a rule that interfered with commerce yet which, given its contribution to honesty in sports practice, fell outside the scope of the Treaty competition rules provided it was applied in a non-discriminatory manner: COMP/37.806, ENIC/UEFA, IP/02/942, 27 June 2002.

  6. 6.

    See, e.g., Feess and Muehleusser 2002, 221.

  7. 7.

    A-G Lenz's Opinion in Bosman contains an extensive and detailed examination, see note 3 above. For a useful collection of materials and some analysis, see Blanpain and Inston 1996; also Beloff, Kerr and Demetriou 1999, Ch. 4; Greenfield 2000, Ch. 8; Dubey 2000, pp. 272–317, 569–83.

  8. 8.

    Para. 110 of the judgment at note 3 above; and set more fully the Opinion of A-G Lenz.

  9. 9.

    For exploration, see, e.g., Thill 1996, 89; Weatherill 1996, 991; Morris, Morrow and Spink 1996, 893; O'Keeffe and Osborne 1996, 111; Seche 1996, 355; Hilf 1996, 1169; Weatherill 1999, pp. 339–82; Spink 1999, 73.

  10. 10.

    Cf. Gardiner and Welch 2000, pp. 107–26; Antinioni and Cubbin 2000, 157.

  11. 11.

    IP/01/314, ‘Outcome of discussions between the Commission and FIFA/UEFA on FIFA Regulations on international football transfers’, 5 March 2001; ‘formalisées’ in French, ‘formell besiegelt’ in German, phrases which, like the English version, lack precise meaning under EC law. Cf. Egger and Stix-Hackl 2002, 81, 90–91.

  12. 12.

    On discontinued proceedings before the Belgian courts, see Bennet 2001, 180. At EC level, a players' union brought an application claiming illegal failure to act on a complaint about the transfer system in Case T-42/0l, SETCA-FGTB v. Commission, but the case was removed from the Court's register on 24 January 2002, and the complaint (COMP/36.583) was rejected on 30 May 2002 as part of the Commission's closure of the investigation. Relevant documentation is collected at http://europa.eu.int/comm/sport/key.files/circ/a_circ_en.html.

  13. 13.

    On how European law stimulates trans-national trade unionism, see Dabscheck 2003, 85.

  14. 14.

    IP/02/824, ‘Commission closes investigations into FIFA regulations on international football transfers’, 5 June 2002. The Commission does not propose to take the matter on to a formal plane.

  15. 15.

    Noted ibid.

  16. 16.

    E.g., Case C-67/96, Albany International v. Stichting Bedrijfspensioefonds Textielindustrie, [1999] ECR 1-5751; Case C-219/97, Maatschappij Drijvende Bokken BV v. Stichting Pensioenfonds, [1999] ECR I-6121.

  17. 17.

    For much fuller investigation and defence of this thesis, see Mortelmans 2001, 613. Cf. Weatherill 2003, 51, 80–86.

  18. 18.

    It may also be vulnerable to attack under national law, though this will vary state by state.

  19. 19.

    IP/02/824, note 14 above.

  20. 20.

    See Paras. 126 and 136 of the Bosman ruling, note 3 above. Cf. Will 1993; Weatherill 1989, 55.

  21. 21.

    Cf. Case C-176/96, Jyri Lehtonen, Castors Canada Dry Namur-Braine ASBL v. Fédération Royale Belge des Sociétés de Basket-ball ASBL, [2000] ECR I-2681, albeit that the system of ‘windows' at stake in that case was tainted by unacceptable discrimination.

  22. 22.

    Cf. Foster 2000C; Blanpain 2003, especially at p. 60.

  23. 23.

    Cf. note 4 above.

  24. 24.

    Cf. Joined Cases C-51/96 and C-191/97, Christelle Deliège v. Ligue Francophone de Judo et Disciplines Associées ASBL, Ligue Belge de Judo ASBL and Union Européene de Judo/François Pacquée, [2000] ECR I-2549.

  25. 25.

    Cf. summary in Roth 2000, Para. 4–150; also J-F. Pons, ‘Sports and European Competition Policy’, speech given on 14 October 1999, available at http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/speeches/index_theme_24.html, and Weatherill 2000B, Ch. 6, pp. 75–92, and Ch. 8, pp. 113–26, respectively. For recent statements of practice by Commission officials (including the above-mentioned Pons), consult http://europa.eu.int/comm/sport/index_en.html. Cf. also Mortelmans 2001, especially at 628; Weatherill 2003.

  26. 26.

    The collectively sold package may be (and increasingly is) broken down into constituent units – live matches, recorded highlights, etc. – but this does not affect the basic issue, which is the suppression of sales by individual clubs. Moreover, rights may be, but need not be, sold exclusively – exclusivity is a matter that is distinct from collectivity. See, on exclusivity, Fleming 1999, 143.

  27. 27.

    The precise nature of this ‘right’ is dictated by national Law; cf. Beloff, Kerr and Demetriou 1999, pp. 134–6 also pp. 153–6; Brinckman and Vollebregt 1998, 281; Nitsche 2000, 208. See also Paras. 118–124 of Decision 2003/778 Champions League, OJ 2003 L 291/25, considered more fully below. For comments on the position under English law by the Restrictive Practices Court, see Para. 219 of Re the supply of services facilitating the broadcasting and television of Premier League football matches, [1999] UKCLR 258, considered in more depth below.

  28. 28.

    Cf. Cave and Crandall 2001, F4, especially at F18. See also Decision 2003/778 Champions League, note 27 above, considered more fully below.

  29. 29.

    Para. 31 Gesetz gegen Wettbewerbsbeschränkungen, as amended with effect from 1 January 1999.

  30. 30.

    Re the supply of services facilitating the broadcasting on television of Premier League football matches, [1999] UKCLR 258.

  31. 31.

    Cf. Szymanski 2000, Ch. 23; also Spink and Morris 2000, pp. 165–96.

  32. 32.

    England: IP/02/1951, 20 December 2002; Germany: IP/03/1106, 24 July 2003.

  33. 33.

    IP/01/583, 20 April 2001.

  34. 34.

    Comm. Dec. 2001/478, OJ 2001 L 171/12.

  35. 35.

    Paras. 49–61 of the Decision. The Commission will monitor change in market structure, particularly in the wake of the ‘Internet revolution’: Para. 56.

  36. 36.

    Para. 59, note 34 above.

  37. 37.

    Ibid., Para. 60.

  38. 38.

    IP/01/1043, 20 July 2001.

  39. 39.

    ‘Background Note’, Memo 01/71, 20 July 2001.

  40. 40.

    See Bose 1999, Ch. 2.

  41. 41.

    IP/02/806, 3 June 2002; OJ 2002 C 196/3.

  42. 42.

    Decision 2003/778, OJ 2003 L 291/25.

  43. 43.

    Paras. 164–167 of the Decision.

  44. 44.

    COM (1999) 644 and/2. For comment, see Weatherill 2000C, 282.

  45. 45.

    Cf. Weatherill 2000A, pp. 155–81.

  46. 46.

    Speech delivered in Brussels on a Conference on Governance in Sport, 6 February 2001, available as Speech/01/84 via http://europa.eu.int/comm/sport/key_files/comp/a_comp_en.html.

  47. 47.

    Support for this approach is expressed by the Committee of the Regions, Opinion on the European Model of Sport, OJ 1999 C 374/56, Para. 3.8.

  48. 48.

    ‘Project Gandalf’, the European Football League, was notified to the Commission, OJ 1999 C 70/5, and though the breakaway has not (yet) been executed the threat was enough to generate changes by UEFA that benefited larger clubs. See, e.g., Van Den Brink 2000, 359, especially 364–5. The ‘G-14’ group of leading clubs has its own website: www.gl4.com/intro.htm.

  49. 49.

    Note 30 above.

  50. 50.

    Available via http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/antitrust/legislation. See, especially Para. 38.

  51. 51.

    Case C-376/98, Germany v. Parliament and Council, [2000] ECR I-8419 (‘Tobacco Advertising’).

  52. 52.

    OJ 1989 L 298/23, OJ 1997 L 202/60, respectively. See generally on this regime, Jones 2000, 299.

  53. 53.

    Arts. 47(2) and 55 (ex 57(2) and 66) EC.

  54. 54.

    Arts. 153(2), 152(1) EC. Cf. Case C-376/98, note 51 above; for discussion of the impact of this case on cultural aspects of harmonized laws, see Katsirea 2003, 190.

  55. 55.

    See Craufurd Smith and Boettcher 2002, 107.

  56. 56.

    Free television for these purposes means ‘broadcasting on a channel, either public or commercial, of programmes which are accessible to the public without payment in addition to the modes of funding of broadcasting that are widely prevailing in each Member State (such as licence fee and/or the basic tier subscription fee to a cable network)’: recital 22.

  57. 57.

    Third Report on the application of Directive 89/552, COM (2001) 9, p. 8.

  58. 58.

    They should be ‘outstanding events which are of interest to the general public in the European Union or in a given Member State or in an important component part of a given member State’: recital 21; recital 18 refers non-exhaustively to the ‘Olympic games, the football World Cup and European football championship’.

  59. 59.

    The most recent consolidated list of measures may be found at OJ 2003 C183/03, and includes measures notified by Italy, Germany, Austria, Ireland, and the UK. For full list, see http://europa.eu.int/comm/avpolicy/regul/twf/3bis/implement_en.htm.

  60. 60.

    Set generally Craufurd Smith 1997.

  61. 61.

    On inelasticity of demand for major events, see Comm. Dec. 2000/400 Eurovision OJ 2000 L 151/18 (annulled, but not on the point of market definition, in Cases T-185/00 et al., M6 and other v. Commission, [2002] ECR II-3805); Comm. Dec. 2000/12 1998 Football World Cup, OJ 2000 L 5/55.

  62. 62.

    Cf. Jones 2000, 326–36.

  63. 63.

    R v. Independent Television Commission, ex parte TV Danmark 1 Ltd., 1 WLR (2001) 1604.

  64. 64.

    As mentioned above, Denmark has now abandoned its list.

  65. 65.

    The Court of Appeal decision is reported at 1 WLR (2001) 74.

  66. 66.

    Cf. Craufurd Smith and Boettcher 2002, with particular reference to the controversial sale of rights to broadcast the World Cup Finals 2002 in the UK.

  67. 67.

    COM (2002) 778, p. 10.

  68. 68.

    Available via http://europa.eu.int/comm/avpolicy/regul/review-twf2003/consult_en.htm. As one might expect, the BBC response to the Commission is warmly supportive of the House of Lords ruling. See http://europa.eu.int/comm/avpolicy/regul/review-twf2003/contribution.htm.

  69. 69.

    Resolution on the broadcasting of sports events, OJ 1996 C 166/109.

  70. 70.

    OJ 2000 C 364/1.

  71. 71.

    Article 52 EU Charter.

  72. 72.

    Cf. more fully Craufurd Smith and Boettcher 2002.

  73. 73.

    E.g., Case C-260/89, ERT v. Dimotiki, [1991] ECR I-2925; Case C-368/95, Vereinigte Familiapress Zeitungs- and vertriebs GmbH v. Heinrich Bauer Verlag, [1997] ECR I-3689; Informationsverein Lentia and others v. Austria, A No 276, 17 EHRR (1993) 93. See Wyatt 2000; Craufurd Smith 1997, especially Ch. 7.

  74. 74.

    Note 68 above.

  75. 75.

    A perspective doubtless in part inspired by pending litigation on its proper role: Case T-33/01, Infront WM v. Commission.

  76. 76.

    Note 68 above.

  77. 77.

    Cf. from the Australian perspective Fraser and McMahon 2002, 1.

  78. 78.

    Cases C-51/96 and 191/97, note 24 above, Paras. 41–42 of the judgment; Case C-176/96, note 21 above, Paras. 32–33 of the judgment.

  79. 79.

    Note 44 above.

  80. 80.

    See Sect. 10.4 of this paper for discussion of the status of this view.

  81. 81.

    Documentation is available via http://europa.eu.int/comm/sport/info/events/forum2001_en.html.

  82. 82.

    Art. I-16.

  83. 83.

    Art. III-182.

  84. 84.

    For general discussion, see Foster 2000B, Ch. 14; Parrish 2000, pp. 21–42; Foster 2000A, pp. 43–64.

  85. 85.

    Cf. Memo/02/127, ‘The application of the EU's competition rules to sports’, 5 June 2002, but the list has already lengthened, cf. notes 5, 31, and 41 above. For a survey, see Weatherill 2003.

  86. 86.

    Case C-309/99, J.C.J Wouters, J.W, Savelbergh, Price Waterhouse Belastingadviseurs BV v. Algemene Raad van de Nederlandse Orde van Advocaten, [2002] ECR I-1577. Cf. Case C-67/96, note 16 above. Strains of this approach are evident in A-G Lenz's Opinion in Bosman.

  87. 87.

    The Commission's decision in ENIC/UEFA, note 5 above, cites Wouters. For its invocation in relation to salary caps, see Hornsby 2002, 142.

  88. 88.

    As in Champions League, note 42 above.

References

  • Antonioni P and Cubbin J (2000) The Bosman Ruling and the Emergence of a Single Market in Soccer Talent, 9 European Journal of Law and Economics, 157–173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beloff M, Kerr T and Demetriou M (1999) Sports Law, Oxford, Hart Publishing, pp. 134–6, pp. 153–6, Ch. 4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennet A (2001) They think it’s all over, […] it is now!-How Extra Time was Required to Finally Settle Football’s Transfer Saga, 9 Sport and the Law Journal, 180 et seq.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blanpain R (2003) The Legal Status of Sportsmen and Sportswomen under International, European and Belgian National and Regional Law, Dordrecht, Kluwer, p. 60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blanpain R and Inston R (1996) The Bosman Case: The End of the Transfer System, Leuven, Peeters.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bose M (1999) Manchester Unlimited, London, Orion Business Books, Ch. 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brinckman D and Vollebregt E (1998) The Marketing of Sport and its Relation to EC Competition Law. ECL Rev 19:281–288.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buzzacchi L, Szymanski S and Valletti T (2003) Equality of Opportunity and Equality of Outcome: Open Leagues, Closed Leagues and Competitive Balance. Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade 3:167–186.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cairns J, Jennett N and Sloane PJ (1986) The Economics of Professional Team Sports: A Survey of Theory and Evidence. Journal of Economic Studies 13:3–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cave M and Crandall RW (2001) Sports Rights and the Broadcast Industry. The Economic Journal 111:4–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craufurd Smith R (1997) Broadcasting Law and Fundamental Rights, Oxford, Clarendon Press, Ch. 7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craufurd Smith R and Boettcher B (2002) Football and Fundamental Rights: Regulating Access to Major Sporting Events on Television, 8 EPL, 107–133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dabscheck B (2003) International Unionism’s Competitive Edge, 58 Relations Industrielles/Industrial Relations, 85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dobson S and Goddard J (2001) The Economics of Football, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dubey JP (2000) La libre circulation des sportifs en Europe, Berne, Staempfli Editions, pp. 272–317, 569–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Egger A and Stix-Hackl C (2002) Sports and Competition Law: a Never-Ending Story?, ECL Rev 81–91, 90–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feess E and Muehleusser G (2002) Economic Consequences of Transfer Fee Regulations in European Football, 13 European Journal of Law and Economics, 221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleming H (1999) Exclusive Rights to Broadcast Sporting Events in Europe. ECL Rev 20:143–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foster K (2000A) Can Sport be Regulated by Europe? An Analysis of Alternative Models, in Caiger A and Gardiner S, eds., Professional Sport in the EU: Regulation and Re-Regulation, The Hague, TMC Asser Press, 43–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foster K (2000B) How can Sport be Regulated? In Greenfield S and Osborn G, Law and Sport in Contemporary Society, London, Portland, Frank Cass, Ch. 14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foster K (2000C) Transfer fees: Still illegal After All These Years?, 01 Singer & Friedlander Football Review, www.le.ac.uk/crss/sf-review/00-01/contents0l.html.

  • Fraser D and McMahon K (2002) When Too Much Sport is Barely Enough: Broadcasting Regulation and National Identity. Entertainment Law 1:1–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardiner S and Welch R (2000) Show Me the Money: Regulation of the Migration of Professional Sportsmen in Post-Bosman Europe. In Caiger A and Gardiner S, eds, Professional Sport in the EU: Regulation and Re-Regulation. The Hague, TMC Asser Press, 107–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenfield S (2000) The Ties that Bind: Charting Contemporary Sporting Contractual Relations. In Greenfield S and Osborn G, Law and Sport in Contemporary Society, London, Portland, Frank Cass, Ch. 8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hilf M (1996) Das Bosman-Urteil des EuGH. NJW 18:1169–1232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hornsby S (2002) The Harder the Cap, the Softer the Law? Sport and the Law Journal 10:142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones CA (2000) Television without Frontiers. Yearbook of European Law 19:299–345.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katsirea I (2003) Why the European Broadcasting Quota should be Abolished. EL Rev 28:190–209.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris E, Morrow S and Spink PM (1996) EC Law and Professional Football: Bosman and its Implications, 59 MLR, 893–902.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mortelmans K (2001) Towards Convergence in the Application of the Rules on Free Movement and on Competition CML Rev 38:613–649, 628.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nitsche I (2000) Collective Marketing of Broadcasting Rights in Europe. ECL Rev 208–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Keeffe D and Osborne P (1996) The European Court Scores a Goal. International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations 12:111–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parrish R (2000) Reconciling Conflicting Approaches to Sport in the European Union, in Caiger A and Gardiner S, eds, Professional Sport in the EU: Regulation and Re-Regulation. The Hague, TMC Asser Press, 21–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quirk J and Fort RD (1997) Pay Dirt: the Business of Professional Team Sports, Oxford and New York, Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosen S and Sanderson A (2001) Labour Markets in Professional Sports. The Economic Journal 111:47–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth P, ed, (2000) Bellamy and Child: European Community Law of Competition, 5th edn., London, Sweet & Maxwell, Para. 4–150.

    Google Scholar 

  • Séché (1996) Quand les juges tirent au but. CDE 32:355–378.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spink PM (1999) Blowing the Whistle on Football’s Domestic Transfer Fee. Juridical Review, 1999:73–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spink PM and Morris P (2000) The Battle for TV Rights in Professional Football. In Caiger A and Gardiner S, eds, Professional Sport in the EU: Regulation and Re-Regulation. The Hague, TMC Asser Press, 165–196.

    Google Scholar 

  • Szymanski S (2000) Hearts, Minds and the Restrictive Practices Court Case, in Hamil S, Michie J, Oughton C and Warby S, eds, Football in the Digital Age: Whose Game is it Anyway? Edinburgh, Mainstream Publishing, Ch. 23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thill M(1996) L’arrêt Bosman et ses implications pour la libre circulation des sportifs a l’interieur de l’U.E. dans des contextes factuels differents de ceux de l’affaire Bosman, Revue du Marché Unique Européen 1996 :89–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van den Brink J (2000) EC Competition Law and the Regulation of Football. ECL Rev 21:359–368, 364–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weatherill S (1989) Discrimination on Grounds of Nationality in Sport, 9 Yearbook of European Law, 55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weatherill S (1996) Annotation of the Bosman ruling CML Rev 33:991–1033.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weatherill S (1999) European Football Law, in Collected Courses of the 7th Session of the Academy of European Law, The Hague, Kluwer Law International, 339–382.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weatherill S (2000A) Resisting the Pressures of Americanization: the influence of European Community Law on the “European Sport Model”. In Greenfield S and Osborn G, Law and Sport in Contemporary Society. London, Portland, Frank Cass, 155–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weatherill S (2000B) Sports under EC Competition Law and EC Antitrust Law. In Hawk B, ed, International Antitrust Law and Policy: Annual Proceedings of the Fordham Corporate Law Institute for 1999, Yonkers, NY, Juris Publishing, Ch. 6, pp. 75–92, Ch. 8, pp. 113–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weatherill S (2000C) The Helsinki Report on Sport. EL Rev 25:282–292.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weatherill S (2003) “Fair Play Please!”: Recent Developments in the Application of EC Law to Sport. CML Rev 40:51–93, 80–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Will MR, ed, (1993) Sportrecht in Europa. Heidelberg, C F Mueller.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wyatt D (2000) Freedom of Expression in the EU Legal Order and in EU Relations with Third Countries, in Beatson J and Cripps Y, eds, Freedom of information: Essays in Honour of DGT Williams, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 205–224, 212.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Somerville College, Oxford, UK

    Stephen Weatherill

Authors
  1. Stephen Weatherill
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephen Weatherill .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 T.M.C. ASSER PRESS, The Hague, The Netherlands, and the authors

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Weatherill, S. (2014). Sport as Culture in EC Law. In: European Sports Law. ASSER International Sports Law Series. T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-6704-939-9_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Societies and partnerships

Search

Navigation