Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Från plan till praxis – Betydelsen av idrottens specifika karaktär vid tillämpningen av EU:s konkurrensrätt

Hertze Hansson, Hanna LU (2024) LAGF03 20241
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
Denna uppsats undersöker hur EU:s konkurrensrätt tillämpas i idrottssammanhang, och hur detta har utvecklats i ljuset av EU-domstolens avgörande i Superleague. Mer specifikt utreds hur den europeiska idrottsmodellen och dess särskilda egenskaper beaktas vid tillämpningen av artikel 101 och 102 FEUF och vilken betydelse artikel 165 FEUF har.
EU:s institutioner erkänner idrottens särart och uppmärksammar meritokrati och tävling på lika villkor som grundläggande pelare för den europeiska idrottsmodellen. Det är även etablerat, genom EU-domstolens praxis, att utövandet av idrott omfattas av konkurrensrätten i EU. Den så kallade idrottsartikeln, artikel 165 FEUF, har dock ingen avgörande betydelse för rättstillämpningen och ger inte uttryck... (More)
Denna uppsats undersöker hur EU:s konkurrensrätt tillämpas i idrottssammanhang, och hur detta har utvecklats i ljuset av EU-domstolens avgörande i Superleague. Mer specifikt utreds hur den europeiska idrottsmodellen och dess särskilda egenskaper beaktas vid tillämpningen av artikel 101 och 102 FEUF och vilken betydelse artikel 165 FEUF har.
EU:s institutioner erkänner idrottens särart och uppmärksammar meritokrati och tävling på lika villkor som grundläggande pelare för den europeiska idrottsmodellen. Det är även etablerat, genom EU-domstolens praxis, att utövandet av idrott omfattas av konkurrensrätten i EU. Den så kallade idrottsartikeln, artikel 165 FEUF, har dock ingen avgörande betydelse för rättstillämpningen och ger inte uttryck för att idrotten ska särbehandlas jämfört med annan verksamhet. Däremot anses idrottens särdrag, exempelvis behovet av regler och övergripande organisation, utgöra ’legitima syften’ som kan beaktas under artikel 101 och 102 FEUF.
Domstolen ger, i Superleague, även uttryck för att det finns regler och förfaranden inom idrotten som helt faller utanför funktionsfördragets tillämpningsområde, men har samtidigt minskat möjligheten att använda idrottens särdrag som rättfärdigande för förfaranden som negativt påverkar konkurrensen. Syftesöverträdelser enligt artikel 101 FEUF eller beteenden som till sin natur strider mot artikel 102 FEUF kan aldrig motiveras av ’legitima syften’.
Idrottens styrande organ måste, likt offentliga myndigheter, även efterleva krav på öppna, objektiva och icke-diskriminerade regler och förfaranden. Deras monopolställning utmanas av domstolen, vilket öppnar för en mer konkurrensutsatt marknad. Den traditionella strukturen för organisation, främst inom fotboll i ljuset av Superleague, kan alltså komma att förändras. (Less)
Abstract
This essay examines how EU competition law is applied in a sporting context, and how this has developed in the light of the European Court of Justice’s (ECJ) judgement in Superleague. More specifically, it investigates how the European sports model and its special characteristics are considered when applying article 101 and 102 TFEU, and what significance article 165 TFEU has.
The institutions of the EU recognize the special nature of sport and acknowledge meritocracy and equal competition as fundamental pillars of the European sports model. It is also established, through the practice of the ECJ, that sporting practice is subject to EU competition law. The so-called sports article, article 165 TFEU, has no decisive impact on the... (More)
This essay examines how EU competition law is applied in a sporting context, and how this has developed in the light of the European Court of Justice’s (ECJ) judgement in Superleague. More specifically, it investigates how the European sports model and its special characteristics are considered when applying article 101 and 102 TFEU, and what significance article 165 TFEU has.
The institutions of the EU recognize the special nature of sport and acknowledge meritocracy and equal competition as fundamental pillars of the European sports model. It is also established, through the practice of the ECJ, that sporting practice is subject to EU competition law. The so-called sports article, article 165 TFEU, has no decisive impact on the application of the law and does not express that sport should be treated differently compared to other activities. On the other hand, the specific characteristics of sport, for example the need for rules and overall organization, are considered ‘legitimate objectives’ that can be considered under article 101 and 102 TFEU.
In Superleague, the court further notes that there are rules and procedures in sports that fall completely outside the scope of TFEU but has, at the same time, reduced the possibility to use the characteristics of sport as justification for procedures that negatively impact competition. Restrictions by object according to article 101 TFEU or conduct that by its very nature infringes article 102 TFEU, can never be justified by ‘legitimate objectives’.
Sport governing bodies must, like public authorities, also comply with requirements for open, objective and non-discriminatory rules and procedures. Their monopoly position is challenged by the court, paving the way for a more competitive market. The traditional structure of organization, mainly in football in the light of Superleague, may thus change going forward. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Hertze Hansson, Hanna LU
supervisor
organization
course
LAGF03 20241
year
type
M2 - Bachelor Degree
subject
keywords
EU-rätt, konkurrensrätt, idrott
language
Swedish
id
9152602
date added to LUP
2024-06-26 11:50:56
date last changed
2024-06-26 11:50:56
@misc{9152602,
  abstract     = {{This essay examines how EU competition law is applied in a sporting context, and how this has developed in the light of the European Court of Justice’s (ECJ) judgement in Superleague. More specifically, it investigates how the European sports model and its special characteristics are considered when applying article 101 and 102 TFEU, and what significance article 165 TFEU has.
The institutions of the EU recognize the special nature of sport and acknowledge meritocracy and equal competition as fundamental pillars of the European sports model. It is also established, through the practice of the ECJ, that sporting practice is subject to EU competition law. The so-called sports article, article 165 TFEU, has no decisive impact on the application of the law and does not express that sport should be treated differently compared to other activities. On the other hand, the specific characteristics of sport, for example the need for rules and overall organization, are considered ‘legitimate objectives’ that can be considered under article 101 and 102 TFEU.
In Superleague, the court further notes that there are rules and procedures in sports that fall completely outside the scope of TFEU but has, at the same time, reduced the possibility to use the characteristics of sport as justification for procedures that negatively impact competition. Restrictions by object according to article 101 TFEU or conduct that by its very nature infringes article 102 TFEU, can never be justified by ‘legitimate objectives’.
Sport governing bodies must, like public authorities, also comply with requirements for open, objective and non-discriminatory rules and procedures. Their monopoly position is challenged by the court, paving the way for a more competitive market. The traditional structure of organization, mainly in football in the light of Superleague, may thus change going forward.}},
  author       = {{Hertze Hansson, Hanna}},
  language     = {{swe}},
  note         = {{Student Paper}},
  title        = {{Från plan till praxis – Betydelsen av idrottens specifika karaktär vid tillämpningen av EU:s konkurrensrätt}},
  year         = {{2024}},
}