Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

EU Internal Market Law and Sport

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover EU Sports Law and Breakaway Leagues in Football

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

  • 1529 Accesses

Abstract

The purpose of this chapter is to set out and discern the principles underlying the application of EU freedom of movement provisions to legal disputes in the sports sector. This chapter presents alternative views on several sports judgments and contributes original ideas on the general framework relevant to the enforcement of Treaty provisions in sporting disputes. It briefly introduces the main analytical framework and legal principles in the field of free movement of persons. Thereafter, all the important sports judgments of the Court are analysed in chronological order, from Walrave decided in 1974 to Murphy in 2011. The analysis of the seminal Bosman decision offers a fresh perspective on the ‘3+2’ rule and its implications for the current UEFA home-grown rule. Judgment in the Bernard case is considered in detail as it is the first sporting judgment of the Court after the Lisbon Treaty amendments.

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 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
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.

    Baquero 2002, p. 85.

  2. 2.

    Articles 11 and 12 TFEU, the environmental protection must be integrated and consumer protection must be taken into account in the definition and implementation of the Union’s policies. Articles 8 and 10 are aimed at eliminating all inequalities between men and women, and all forms of discrimination.

  3. 3.

    See Case C-325/08 Bernard, discussed in Sect. 4.8.

  4. 4.

    The Lisbon Treaty and EU Sports Policy Study (2010), p. 10.

  5. 5.

    See Preamble of Regulation 1612/68 on freedom of movement for workers within Community OJ L 257 19.10.1968; and the Opinion of AG Trabucchi in Case 7/75 Mr and Mrs F v Belgian State [1975] ECR 679.

  6. 6.

    See, for example, Semmelmann 2008, p. 15.

  7. 7.

    See Case 270/80 Polydor Limited and RSO Records Inc. v. Harlequen Records Shops Limited and Simons Records Limited, [1982] ECR 329, para 18; and Case 15/81 Gaston Schul Douane Expediteur BV v. Inspecteur der Invoerrechten en Accijnzen, Roosendaal [1982] ECR 1409.

  8. 8.

    See Barnard 2010, pp. 233–235.

  9. 9.

    See Case 106/77 Amministrazione delle Finanze dello Stato v. Simmenthal SpA [1978] ECR 629; and Cases C-10-22/97 Ministero delle Finanze v. IN.CO. GE’90 Srl [1998] ECR I-6307.

  10. 10.

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

  11. 11.

    Ibid. para 17.

  12. 12.

    Case 43/75 Gabrielle Defrenne v Société anonyme belge de navigation aérienne Sabena [1976] ECR 455.

  13. 13.

    Case C-281/98 Roman Angonese v Cassa di Risparmio di Bolzano SpA [2000] ECR I-4139.

  14. 14.

    However, see Barnard 2010, p. 234, for the argument that the direct effect in this and other sports cases is an extended form of vertical direct effect.

  15. 15.

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

  16. 16.

    Paragraphs 138–139 of his Opinion in Case C-415/93 Bosman.

  17. 17.

    Case C-415/93 Union Royale Belge Sociétés de Football Association and others v. Bosman and others [1995] ECR I-4921.

  18. 18.

    Ibid. para 76.

  19. 19.

    Case C-19/92 Kraus [1993] ECR I-1663 para 32; and Case C-55/94 Gebhard [1995] ECR I-4165 para 37.

  20. 20.

    However, Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) later adapted its worldwide international transfer rules to Bosman ruling as well.

  21. 21.

    Regulation (EEC) No. 1612/68 of the Council of 15 October 1968 on freedom of movement for workers within the Community (OJ, English special edition, 1968 (II), p. 475). Article 4(1) of this regulation reads: Provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action of the Member States which restrict by number or percentage the employment of foreign nationals in any undertaking, branch of activity or region, or at a national level, are not to apply to nationals of the other Member States’.

  22. 22.

    After this judgment, Arsenal and Chelsea were the first clubs to field an all-foreign start-up line in their official matches. On a different note, even though the Court in Bosman was explicit about prohibition of nationality quotas, in basketball they are maintained until today and nobody has challenged them in a private action.

  23. 23.

    But see the Opinion of AG Lenz in Case C-415/93 Bosman that did address the competition law issues.

  24. 24.

    See, for example, Blanpain 2003; Miettinen and Parrish 2008; Blanpain and Inston 1996; and Késenne 2009.

  25. 25.

    See Parrish 2003, p. 17.

  26. 26.

    Gardiner and Welch 2000, pp. 107–126.

  27. 27.

    UEFA—Investing in Local Training of Players: Key Messages. Available at http://www.uefa.com/multimediafiles/download/uefa/uefamedia/273604_download.pdf.

  28. 28.

    FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (2012), Annexe 3, Article 4(2).

  29. 29.

    Ibid. Article 10(1) of the Regulations.

  30. 30.

    Study on the Economic and Legal Aspects of Transfers of Players, p. 159. Available at http://ec.europa.eu/sport/library/documents/f-studies/cons-study-transfers-final-rpt.pdf.

  31. 31.

    Ibid. p. 242.

  32. 32.

    Ibid. p. 196.

  33. 33.

    Ibid. p. 6.

  34. 34.

    Ibid. p. 7.

  35. 35.

    Ibid. p. 6.

  36. 36.

    Ibid. p. 7.

  37. 37.

    pp. 245–247.

  38. 38.

    For details see Sect. 3.3.6.1.

  39. 39.

    At the Ordinary Congress in Estonia in April 2005.

  40. 40.

    The home-grown players rule can be found in Article 18 of the Regulations of the UEFA Champions League 2010/2011, Article 18 of the Regulations of the UEFA Europa League 2010/2011, and Article 15 of the Regulations of the UEFA Super Cup 2010.

  41. 41.

    According to the 6+5 rule, at the start of each match football clubs must field in at least six players eligible to play for the national team of the country of the club.

  42. 42.

    At the 60th FIFA Congress meeting in Johannesburg in June Barnard 2010 it was decided to withdraw the 6+5 proposal.

  43. 43.

    See Commission Press Release IP/08/807 ‘UEFA Rule on ‘Home-Grown Players’: Compatibility with the Principle of Free Movement of Persons’ 28 May 2008.

  44. 44.

    See, for instance, European Parliament Resolution on the White Paper on Sport, 2007/2261(INI) and European Parliament Resolution of 2 February 2011 on the European Dimension in Sport, 2011/2087(INI).

  45. 45.

    Ibid. 2011/2087(INI), para 72.

  46. 46.

    Ibid. p. 638.

  47. 47.

    Commission Press Release IP/08/807 ‘UEFA Rule on ‘Home-Grown Players’: Compatibility with the Principle of Free Movement of Persons’ 28 May 2008.

  48. 48.

    Study on the Assessment of the UEFA’s ‘Home Grown Players Rule’, negotiated procedure EAC 07/2012, 30 April 2013, p. 58.

  49. 49.

    Case 56/65 Société La Technique Minière v. Maschinenbau Ulm GmbH [1966] ECR 235. Similarly, in CEPSA, the Court held that ‘the automatic nullity provided for in Article [101(2)] EC affects a contract in its entirety only if the clauses which are incompatible with Article [101(1)] are not severable from the contract itself. Otherwise, the consequences of the nullity, in respect of all the other parts of the contract, are not a matter for [Union] law’. See Case 279/06 CEPSA Estaciones de Servicio SA v. LV Tobar e Hijos SL, judgement of 11 September, 2008, para 80.

  50. 50.

    The full text of this provision is: ‘Any clause of a collective or individual agreement or of any other collective regulation concerning eligibility for employment, employment, remuneration and other conditions of work or dismissal shall be null and void in so far as it lays down or authorises discriminatory conditions in respect of workers who are nationals of the other Member States’.

  51. 51.

    See, for example, Case 319/82 Société de Vente de Ciments et Bétons de l’Est v. Kerpen & Kerpen GmbH & Co KG [1983] ECR 4173, para 11.

  52. 52.

    Case C-325/08 Bernard, para 40.

  53. 53.

    Study on the Assessment of the UEFA’s ‘Home Grown Players Rule’, negotiated procedure EAC 07/2012, 30 April 2013.

  54. 54.

    Ibid. p. 58.

  55. 55.

    Ibid. pp. 60–61.

  56. 56.

    Ibid. pp. 61–62.

  57. 57.

    Ibid. p. 62.

  58. 58.

    Ibid. p. 68.

  59. 59.

    Ibid.

  60. 60.

    Ibid. p. 70.

  61. 61.

    Ibid. p. 71.

  62. 62.

    Ibid. p. 110.

  63. 63.

    Ibid.

  64. 64.

    Ibid. p. 112.

  65. 65.

    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, Union européenne de judo and François Pacquée [2000] ECR I-2549, para 22.

  66. 66.

    It cited paras 4, 17 and 18 from Walrave, paras 14 and 15 from Donà and paras 73, 76, 82, 83 and 127 from Bosman.

  67. 67.

    Joined cases C-51/96 and C-191/97 Deliège, para 42.

  68. 68.

    Ibid. para 46.

  69. 69.

    Ibid. para 54.

  70. 70.

    Ibid. para 56.

  71. 71.

    Ibid.

  72. 72.

    Ibid. para 60.

  73. 73.

    Ibid. para 64, (emphasis added).

  74. 74.

    See Parrish and Miettinen 2008, p. 90. For discussion on sporting exceptions see Chap. 6, and specifically on inherent rules see Sect. 6.3.3.

  75. 75.

    Joined cases C-51/96 and C-191/97 Deliège, para 65.

  76. 76.

    Case C-176/96 Jyri Lehtonen and Castors Canada Dry Namur-Braine ASBL v. Fédération royale belge des sociétés de basket-ball ASBL (FRBSB) [2000] ECR I-2681.

  77. 77.

    Case C-438/00 Deutscher Handballbund v. Kolpak [2003] ECR I-4135.

  78. 78.

    Case C-265/03 Igor Simutenkov v. Ministerio de Educación y Cultura, Real Federación Española de Fútbol [2005] ECR I-2579.

  79. 79.

    Case C-152/08 Real Sociedad de Fútbol SAD and Nihat Kahveci v Consejo Superior de Deportes and Real Federación Española de Fútbol [2008] ECR I-6291.

  80. 80.

    Europe Agreement establishing an association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Slovak Republic, of the other part, signed in Luxembourg on 4 October 1993 and approved on behalf of the Communities by Decision 94/909/EC, ECSC, Euratom of the Council and the Commission of 19 December 1994 (OJ 1993 L 359, p. 1) (‘the Association Agreement with Slovakia’).

  81. 81.

    Agreement on partnership and cooperation establishing a partnership between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Russian Federation, of the other part, signed in Corfu on 24 June 1994 and approved on behalf of the Communities by Decision 97/800/EC ECSC, Euratom: Council and Commission Decision of 30 October 1997 (OJ 1994 L 327, p. 1) (‘the Communities-Russia Partnership Agreement’).

  82. 82.

    The Additional Protocol, signed on 23 November 1970 in Brussels and concluded, approved and confirmed on behalf of the Community by Council Regulation (EEC) No 2760/72 of 19 December 1972 (OJ 1973 C 133, p. 17) (‘the Additional Protocol’), annexed to the Agreement establishing an Association between the European Economic Community and Turkey, signed at Ankara on 12 September 1963 by the Republic of Turkey, of the one part, and by the Member States of the EEC and the Community, on the other part, and concluded, approved and confirmed on behalf of the Community by Council Decision 64/732/EEC of 23 December 1963 (OJ 1973 C 113, p. 1) (‘the EEC-Turkey Association Agreement’).

  83. 83.

    Article 23(1) of the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement provides: ‘Subject to the laws, conditions and procedures applicable in each Member State, the Community and its Member States shall ensure that the treatment accorded to Russian nationals, legally employed in the territory of a Member State shall be free from any discrimination based on nationality, as regards working conditions, remuneration or dismissal, as compared to its own nationals.’ Article 38 of the Europe Agreement between the Community and Slovakia reads: ‘Subject to the conditions and modalities applicable in each Member State: treatment accorded to workers of Slovak Republic nationality legally employed in the territory of a Member State shall be free from any discrimination based on nationality, as regards working conditions, remuneration or dismissal, as compared to its own nationals’.

  84. 84.

    For example, Georgia, Serbia, Moldova, Ukraine, Algeria, Morocco, Armenia and many others.

  85. 85.

    Case C-325/08 Olympique Lyonnais SASP v. Olivier Bernard and Newcastle United FC judgment of grand Chamber of the Court delivered on 16 March 2010. The following case comment was first published in Pijetlovic 2010 Another Classic of EU Sports Jurisprudence: Legal Implications of Olympique Lyonnais SASP v. Olivier Bernard and Newcastle UFC (C-325/08) European Law Review (35), pp. 858–869.

  86. 86.

    C-325/08 Bernard, para 30.

  87. 87.

    Paragraph 30 of the AG Sharpston’s opinion in C-325/08 Bernard says that ‘the specific characteristics of sport in general, and football in particular, do not seem to me to be of paramount importance when considering whether there is a prohibited restriction on freedom of movement. […]’.

  88. 88.

    Case C-325/08 Bernard, para 39.

  89. 89.

    Ibid. para 40.

  90. 90.

    Case 176/96 Lehtonen [2000] ECR I-2681.

  91. 91.

    Case C-438/00 Kolpak [2003] ECR I-4135.

  92. 92.

    Case C-265/03 Simutenkov [2005] ECR I-2579.

  93. 93.

    The traditional measure-classification stage in the analysis is nonetheless still evident in the Court’s analytical structure in several cases. See Barnard 2010, pp. 246–257.

  94. 94.

    See, for e.g., Case C-67/97 Bluhme [1998] ECR I-6717 (biodiversity), Case C-2/90 Commission v. Belgium (Walloon Waste) [1992] ECR I-4431 (environmental protection), Case C-19/92 Kraus [1993] ECR I-1663 (protection of public against misleading use of academic titles).

  95. 95.

    C-415/93 Bosman, para 109.

  96. 96.

    As required by the objective accepted as legitimate in para 39 of C-325/08 Bernard and para 108 of C-415/93 Bosman.

  97. 97.

    The objective required that the restrictive rule encourages clubs to train and recruit young players, and not that it did not discourage clubs from doing so. The aim of ‘not discouraging’ presents a lower bar in terms of finding the restrictive rule suitable for the attainment of the objective than the aim of ‘encouraging’. Therefore, the restrictive rule (training compensation) used to attain the objective as re-worded and modified in Bernard will more likely be found suitable in the former (i.e. not discouraging) but not in the latter.

  98. 98.

    Weatherill 2010, p. 5.

  99. 99.

    Lindholm 2010, p. 1192.

  100. 100.

    See Sect. 4.8.2.6 below for the text of para 49.

  101. 101.

    FIFPro report on the Joint FIFA/UEFA Negotiation Document (International Transfer of Players).

  102. 102.

    See paras 50–51 of her Opinion in Case C-325/08 Bernard.

  103. 103.

    Ibid. para 57.

  104. 104.

    Weatherill 2010, p. 5.

  105. 105.

    Van den Bogaert 2005, pp. 256–257.

  106. 106.

    It takes an average of 10 players to produce one professional. See European Commission, Education of Young Sportspersons, Final Report by PMP in partnership with the Institute of Sport and Leisure Policy Loughborough University (August 2004), p. 49, and Blanpain 2003, p. 52.

  107. 107.

    See para 52 of her Opinion in Case C-325/08 Bernard.

  108. 108.

    See Weatherill 2010, p. 4.

  109. 109.

    Case C-325/08 Bernard, para 49.

  110. 110.

    Ibid. para 50 (emphasis added).

  111. 111.

    Ibid. Article 20.

  112. 112.

    Ibid.

  113. 113.

    Annex 4, FIFA Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players.

  114. 114.

    Ibid.

  115. 115.

    FIFA circular letter nr. 1223.

  116. 116.

    Annex 4, FIFA Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players.

  117. 117.

    In other words, UEFA as a confederative body sets sums for all European national football associations, and other regional governing bodies set the sums in their respective regions.

  118. 118.

    See on this point also Van den Bogaert 2005, pp. 256–257, and Drolet 2009, pp. 167–190.

  119. 119.

    See Article 10 TFEU and Council Directive 2000/78 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation OJ L 303/16, 2 December 2000.

  120. 120.

    Case T-385/07 Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) v. Commission, judgment of 17 February 2011, Case T-55/08 Union des associations européennes de football (UEFA) v. Commission, judgment of 17 February 2011; and Case T-68/08 Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) v. Commission, judgment of 17 February 2011. See also the General Court’s Press Release No. 9/11 ‘Judgments in Cases T-385/07, T-55/08 and T-68/08 FIFA and UEFA v Commission’ Luxembourg, 17 February 2011.

  121. 121.

    Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2010 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audiovisual media services (Audiovisual Media Services Directive), OJ L 95, 15/4/2010, pp. 1–24.

  122. 122.

    Joined Cases C-403/08 and C-429/08 FAPL and others v. QC Leisure and others; and Karen Murphy v Media Protection Services Ltd., judgment of 4 October 2011. Section 4.10 on the Murphy case has been analysed in detail by Pijetlovic and Nyman-Metcalf 2013.

  123. 123.

    Case C-403/08 Football Association Premier League v QC Leisure YouTube. that was joined with Case C-429/08 Karen Murphy v Media Protection Services Ltd.

  124. 124.

    Ibid.

  125. 125.

    The price was ca. £1000 per month.

  126. 126.

    Case C-429/08 Karen Murphy v Media Protection Services Ltd. that was joined with Case C-403/08 Football Association Premier League v QC Leisure YouTube.

  127. 127.

    See sections 297(1) and 298 of the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988, as amended.

  128. 128.

    Council Directive 98/84/EC on the legal protection of services based on, or consisting of, conditional access. OJ L 320/54, 28.11.1998.

  129. 129.

    Article 1 of CAD.

  130. 130.

    Article 2(c) and (e) of CAD.

  131. 131.

    Joined Cases C-403/08 and C-429/08 Murphy, paras 62–67.

  132. 132.

    Ibid. paras 68–74.

  133. 133.

    Generally, there are three types of abuses of rights under EU law: circumvention (or U-turn transactions), fraud and misuse. For explanation of the concepts see, for example, Kjellgren 2000, pp. 179–194.

  134. 134.

    Case C-110/99, Emsland-Stärke GmbH v Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Jonas, (2000) ECR I-1569.

  135. 135.

    Case C-321/05, Hans Markus Kofoed v Skatteministeriet (2007), ECR I-05795, para 38.

  136. 136.

    Case C-110/99, Emsland-Stärke, paras 52–53.

  137. 137.

    This finding indirectly subsequently freed Ms Murphy from criminal liability in the national proceedings. See Murphy v. Media Protection Services Ltd [2012] EWHC 466 (Admin).

  138. 138.

    Ibid. paras 85–89.

  139. 139.

    Paragraph 94 of Joined Cases C–403/08 and C–429/08 Murphy.

  140. 140.

    Ibid. paras 96–99.

  141. 141.

    Ibid. para 100.

  142. 142.

    Ibid. para 101. The first time the Court mentioned Article 165(1) was in C-325/08 Bernard.

  143. 143.

    Case C-176/96 Lehtonen and Castors Braine [2000] ECR I-2681.

  144. 144.

    Case C-415/93 Bosman and Case C-325/08 Bernard.

  145. 145.

    Case 519/04 Meca-Medina.

  146. 146.

    Paragraphs 105–117.

  147. 147.

    Paragraph 192 of her Opinion in Joined Cases C-403/08 and C-429/08 Murphy.

  148. 148.

    Case C-519/04 David Meca-Medina and Igor Majcen v. Commission [2006] ECR I-6991.

  149. 149.

    Kaburakis et al. 2012, p. 313.

  150. 150.

    See para 40 of Case C-325/08 Bernard. For discussion see Pijetlovic 2010, pp. 862–867.

  151. 151.

    Opinion of AG in Joined Cases C-403/08 and C-429/08 Murphy, para 206.

  152. 152.

    This follows from paras 206–210 of her Opinion.

  153. 153.

    Ibid. (suggested in para 209).

  154. 154.

    See Deloitte Annual Report of Football Finance (2011).

  155. 155.

    Paragraph 208 of her Opinion.

  156. 156.

    Ibid. para 209 reads: ‘[…] in an investigation of the closed periods under competition law the Commission found that only 10 of 22 associations had actually adopted a closed period. No closed periods were adopted in France, Germany, Italy and Spain, or in Northern Ireland, that is to say, within the sphere of influence of English football. Furthermore, in Germany today all Bundesliga matches are evidently transmitted live without attendance at matches in the top two leagues suffering as a result’.

  157. 157.

    Paragraph 210 of her Opinion in Joined Cases C-403/08 and C-429/08 Murphy.

  158. 158.

    Joined Cases C-403/08 and C-429/08 Murphy, paras 134–146.

  159. 159.

    Ibid. para 149.

  160. 160.

    Ibid. para 182.

  161. 161.

    Ibid. para 197.

  162. 162.

    Ibid. para 198.

  163. 163.

    Ibid. paras 199 and 207.

  164. 164.

    Council Directive 93/83/EEC of 27 September 1993 on the coordination of certain rules concerning copyright and rights related to copyright applicable to satellite broadcasting and cable retransmission OJ L 248 ,06/10/1993 pp. 0015–0021.

  165. 165.

    Ward and Amor 2012, pp. 86–90.

  166. 166.

    Doukas 2012, p. 626.

  167. 167.

    See Sect. 1.2.1.

  168. 168.

    Opinion of AG in Joined Cases C-403/08 and C-429/08 Murphy, para 202.

References

  • Barnard C (2010) The substantive law of the EU, 3rd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Baquero Cruz J (2002) Between competition and free movement: the economic constitutional law of the European Community. Hart Publishing, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Blanpain R (2003) The legal status of sportsmen and sportswomen under international, European and Belgian national and regional law. Kluwer Law International, The Hague

    Google Scholar 

  • Blanpain R, Inston R (1996) The Bosman case: the end of the transfer system? Sweet & Maxwell, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Doukas D (2012) The sky is not the (only) limit—sports broadcasting without frontiers and the Court of Justice: comment on Murphy. Eur Law Rev 37:605–626

    Google Scholar 

  • Drolet J-C (2009) Extra time: are the new FIFA transfer rules doomed? In: Gardiner S, Parrish R, Siekmann R (eds) EU, sport, law and policy. TMC Asser Press, The Hague, pp 167–190

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gardiner S, Welch R (2000) Show me the money: regulation of the migration of professional sportsmen in post-Bosman Europe. In: Caiger A, Gardiner S (eds) Professional sport in the EU: regulation and re-regulation. T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague, pp 107–126

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaburakis A, Lindholm J, Rodenberg R (2012) British pubs, decoder cards and the future of intellectual property licensing after Murphy. Columbia J Eur Law 18:307–322

    Google Scholar 

  • Késenne S (2009) The Bosman case and European football. In: Andreff W, Szymanski S (eds) Handbook on the economics of sport. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 636–642

    Google Scholar 

  • Kjellgren A (2000) On the border of abuse—the jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice on circumvention, fraud and other misuses of community law. Eur Bus Law Rev 11:179–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindholm J (2010) Case C-325/08, Olympique Lyonnais SASP v. Olivier Bernard and Newcastle United UFC, judgment of the Court of Justice (Grand Chamber) of 16 March 2010, not yet reported. Common Market Law Rev 47:1187–1197

    Google Scholar 

  • Miettinen S, Parrish R (2008) Nationality discrimination in community law: an assessment of UEFA regulations governing player eligibility for European club competitions (the Home-Grown Player Rule). Entertain Sports Law J 5(2). http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/law/elj/eslj/issues/volume5/number2/miettinen_parrish

  • Parrish R (2003) Sports law and policy in the European Union. Manchester University Press, Manchester

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Parrish R, Miettinen S (2008) Sporting exception in European Union law. T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Pijetlovic K (2010) Another classic of EU sports jurisprudence: legal implications of Olympique Lyonnais SASP v. Olivier Bernard and Newcastle UFC (C-325/08). Eur Law Rev 35:858–869

    Google Scholar 

  • Pijetlovic K, Nyman-Metcalf K (2013) Liberalising the market for satellite transmission: interplay between intellectual property rights, specificity of sport and TFEU economic provisions in Murphy (joined cases C-403/08 and C-429/08). Int Sports Law J 13:82–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Semmelmann C (2008) The future role of the non-competition goals in the interpretation of Article 81 EC. Glob Antitrust Rev 1:15–47

    Google Scholar 

  • Van den Bogaert S (2005) Practical regulation of the mobility of sportsmen in the EU post bosman. Kluwer Law International, The Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  • Ward C, Amor D (2012) Significant change to the European media rights landscape. Comput Telecommun Law Rev 18:86–90

    Google Scholar 

  • Weatherill S (2010) The Olivier Bernard case: how, if at all, to fix compensation for training young players? Int Sports Law J 1–2:3–6

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Helsinki, Finland

    Katarina Pijetlovic

Authors
  1. Katarina Pijetlovic
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Katarina Pijetlovic .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 T.M.C. Asser Press and the author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Pijetlovic, K. (2015). EU Internal Market Law and Sport. In: EU Sports Law and Breakaway Leagues in Football. ASSER International Sports Law Series. T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-048-0_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Societies and partnerships

Search

Navigation