The ‘Gatekeeping’ Power of Sports Governing Bodies: Entry Barriers into Professional Sports Leagues under EU Competition Law
(2025) JAEM03 20251Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract
- While the original ideals of sport were rooted primarily in recreation and physical competition, they have since long been complemented, potentially even overshadowed, by elements of entertainment and commercialization. At the center of professional sports stand sports governing bodies, typically or- ganized as non-profit organizations, which are responsible for regulating their respective disciplines. In the European context, sports governance follows a pyramidal structure, traditionally featuring a single governing body per sport per level. Due to this setup and the rights conferred on the governing bodies, they wield significant power in shaping the regulatory and commercial land- scape of sport. This combination of regulatory... (More)
- While the original ideals of sport were rooted primarily in recreation and physical competition, they have since long been complemented, potentially even overshadowed, by elements of entertainment and commercialization. At the center of professional sports stand sports governing bodies, typically or- ganized as non-profit organizations, which are responsible for regulating their respective disciplines. In the European context, sports governance follows a pyramidal structure, traditionally featuring a single governing body per sport per level. Due to this setup and the rights conferred on the governing bodies, they wield significant power in shaping the regulatory and commercial land- scape of sport. This combination of regulatory authority, binding on all mem- bers, and a growing interest in preserving and expanding commercial oppor- tunities gives rise to a structural conflict of interest, which lies at the core of this thesis.
While the Court of Justice of the European Union has acknowledged the spe- cial social and cultural role of sports, it has consistently affirmed that sporting activity, where it constitutes economic activity, is subject to EU competition law. In particular, the conflict of interests raises significant concerns under Article 102 TFEU. Although this provision, in principle, is capable of ad- dressing anti-competitive behavior in sports governance, its enforcement suf- fers from significant shortcomings, including lengthy proceedings, frag- mented adjudication, and an ex-post approach that struggles to prevent market harm in a timely manner.
In contrast, in the digital sector, the Digital Markets Act was introduced to proactively address similar concerns arising from undertakings that control core platform services – so called digital gatekeepers. The regulation’s ex- ante framework, enforced solely by the European Commission, provides a model for more timely and effective intervention to prevent harm to compe- tition.
Although digital markets and sports governance differ in their underlying structures and policy contexts, there are functional parallels, such as the risk of self-preferencing, the existence of entrenched market power, and the chal- lenges of effective enforcement. Several key obligations under the Digital Markets Act – such as the prohibition of self-preferencing, anti-steering and anti-parity clauses, as well as interoperability requirements and fair, reasona- ble and non-discriminatory access criteria – can be meaningfully adapted to the context of sports.
If adjusted appropriately to reflect the specificities of sport, and the autonomy conditionally afforded to the sports governing bodies by the Court of Justice, such provisions modelled after the Digital Markets Act could significantly
III
improve enforcement of competition rules in the context of sports. The result would be a more balanced and coherent legal framework that both preserves the integrity of sport and safeguards the contestability of sports markets.
This thesis therefore proposes the adoption of a sector-specific regulation for sport, inspired by the Digital Markets Act, with the aim of keeping sports markets fair and open, while still respecting the conditional regulatory auton- omy of the sports governing bodies. While Articles 165 and 6 (e) TFEU un- derline the Union’s supporting role in the field of sport, they do not neces- sarily preclude a legislative initiative under Article 114 TFEU, provided that sufficient political will can be mobilized. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9212408
- author
- Kranz, Vanessa LU
- supervisor
- organization
- course
- JAEM03 20251
- year
- 2025
- type
- H2 - Master's Degree (Two Years)
- subject
- keywords
- Competition law EU law Sports governance Sports governing bodies (SGBs) European Sports Model (ESM) Article 102 TFEU Conditional autonomy European Court of Justice (CJEU) Digital Markets Act (DMA) Gatekeepers Ex-ante regulation Self-preferencing Market access Essential facilities doctrine International Skating Union (ISU) European Super League (ESL) Formula 1 Enforcement mechanisms
- language
- English
- id
- 9212408
- date added to LUP
- 2025-09-18 11:44:01
- date last changed
- 2025-09-18 11:44:01
@misc{9212408,
abstract = {{While the original ideals of sport were rooted primarily in recreation and physical competition, they have since long been complemented, potentially even overshadowed, by elements of entertainment and commercialization. At the center of professional sports stand sports governing bodies, typically or- ganized as non-profit organizations, which are responsible for regulating their respective disciplines. In the European context, sports governance follows a pyramidal structure, traditionally featuring a single governing body per sport per level. Due to this setup and the rights conferred on the governing bodies, they wield significant power in shaping the regulatory and commercial land- scape of sport. This combination of regulatory authority, binding on all mem- bers, and a growing interest in preserving and expanding commercial oppor- tunities gives rise to a structural conflict of interest, which lies at the core of this thesis.
While the Court of Justice of the European Union has acknowledged the spe- cial social and cultural role of sports, it has consistently affirmed that sporting activity, where it constitutes economic activity, is subject to EU competition law. In particular, the conflict of interests raises significant concerns under Article 102 TFEU. Although this provision, in principle, is capable of ad- dressing anti-competitive behavior in sports governance, its enforcement suf- fers from significant shortcomings, including lengthy proceedings, frag- mented adjudication, and an ex-post approach that struggles to prevent market harm in a timely manner.
In contrast, in the digital sector, the Digital Markets Act was introduced to proactively address similar concerns arising from undertakings that control core platform services – so called digital gatekeepers. The regulation’s ex- ante framework, enforced solely by the European Commission, provides a model for more timely and effective intervention to prevent harm to compe- tition.
Although digital markets and sports governance differ in their underlying structures and policy contexts, there are functional parallels, such as the risk of self-preferencing, the existence of entrenched market power, and the chal- lenges of effective enforcement. Several key obligations under the Digital Markets Act – such as the prohibition of self-preferencing, anti-steering and anti-parity clauses, as well as interoperability requirements and fair, reasona- ble and non-discriminatory access criteria – can be meaningfully adapted to the context of sports.
If adjusted appropriately to reflect the specificities of sport, and the autonomy conditionally afforded to the sports governing bodies by the Court of Justice, such provisions modelled after the Digital Markets Act could significantly
III
improve enforcement of competition rules in the context of sports. The result would be a more balanced and coherent legal framework that both preserves the integrity of sport and safeguards the contestability of sports markets.
This thesis therefore proposes the adoption of a sector-specific regulation for sport, inspired by the Digital Markets Act, with the aim of keeping sports markets fair and open, while still respecting the conditional regulatory auton- omy of the sports governing bodies. While Articles 165 and 6 (e) TFEU un- derline the Union’s supporting role in the field of sport, they do not neces- sarily preclude a legislative initiative under Article 114 TFEU, provided that sufficient political will can be mobilized.}},
author = {{Kranz, Vanessa}},
language = {{eng}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{The ‘Gatekeeping’ Power of Sports Governing Bodies: Entry Barriers into Professional Sports Leagues under EU Competition Law}},
year = {{2025}},
}