The Madrid court rules in favor of the Super League against FIFA and UEFA

FIFA and UEFA have “abused their dominant position” and must “stop their anti-competitive behavior”, according to a Madrid commercial court ruling in a Super League football case published this Monday.

The court partially upheld a claim brought by the Madrid-based European Super League (ESLC) against UEFA and FIFA, saying both organizations were abusing their dominant position and impeding free competition in the market.

UEFA and FIFA claim “discretionary powers to prohibit participation in alternative competitions and impose unjustified and disproportionate restrictions”, which violates the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), the Supreme Court and Judge (TSJ) of Madrid also says.

Thus, the claim brought by the ESLC, the body that announced the creation of the European Super League in 2021, was partially upheld against UEFA and FIFA, who said from the outset that they would exclude clubs and players who took part in their competitions. in a new project.

The court orders FIFA and UEFA, who can appeal the decision, to “cease the sanctioned anti-competitive conduct” and prohibits “its recurrence in the future”, and also orders them to “immediately eliminate all consequences of anti-competitive behavior that occurred before or during the period of this procedure.”

In April 2021, the ESLC announced the launch of the Super League, which was initially promoted by Spanish clubs Real Madrid, Barcelona and Atlético Madrid, Italian clubs Milan, Inter Milan and Juventus, and English clubs Liverpool “, Manchester City, Chelsea, Manchester United and Tottenham.

The first version of the Super League project was quickly buried, in part due to opposition from the English club’s fans and threats from UEFA and FIFA, and gradually some of its subscribers left the club.

The original idea of ​​a closed competition for 20 clubs, with founding teams, some visiting teams and others to be ranked annually based on their results, was later changed to an open competition with 64 competitors, promotion and relegation, and a women’s tournament for 32 clubs.

The decision published today notes that “although the Super League, according to the terms originally put forward in the claim, that is, according to the original draft,” has already been rejected by its organizers, “the petitions against it must also be rejected.” .

But “there is no way to impose a ban or restriction in the abstract, that is, to impose a future ban on any other project or modification of what has already been submitted,” he states.

“To admit otherwise would be to accept some kind of prohibition or protection of any project of football competitions presented by the plaintiffs, which is unacceptable,” he adds.

That way, “stakeholders can change and adapt it later.”

“This does not determine that the subject of the procedure is the authorization of any competition, but rather lays the foundations for directing a system of free competition to organize football competitions,” the decision emphasizes.