Complaint lodged against FIFA’s dominant position

Two of the world’s major football bodies (FIFPro and the European Leagues body) have issued a joint statement to announce that they shall be challenging the legality of the International Federation of Association Football (FIFA)’s power to unilaterally set out the international match calendar, which in their view “infringes European Union (EU) competition law and notably constitutes an abuse of dominance”.

Together, they are requesting the Brussels Court of Commerce to refer their grievances to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in order to obtain a preliminary ruling on four pertinent questions :-

1. Whether the rights guaranteed to workers and their trade unions by the EU Charter of Rights, in particular Articles 5, 15, 28 and 31, prohibit FIFA scheduling the Club World Cup 2025 at a time that has traditionally represented the ‘window’ when players would take an annual break, and against the formal representations of player/worker unions.

2. Whether the unilateral imposition of such decisions on players infringes the rights under Article 28 of the Charter for those players to collectively bargain over their terms and conditions of employment.
   
   
3. Whether the right to healthy working conditions, guaranteed by Article 28, is violated by FIFA’s decision to impose significant additional workload via the Club World Cup 2025.
   
   
4. Whether FIFA’s unilateral decisions with regard to the International Match Calendar and the Club World Cup 2025 give rise to “restrictions of competition” pursuant to article 101 TFEU.

Three of the referrals related to an alleged breach of certain provisions emanating out of EU Charter of Fundamental Rights concerning a number of fundamental guarantees and rights to workers and their trade unions which emanate out of the Charter such as the prohibition of forced or compulsory labour, freedom of work, the right to negotiate and conclude collective agreements, the right to healthy working conditions and the right to an annual period of paid leave.

FIFPro and the European Leagues body are alleging that FIFA have failed to engage or negotiate with the relevant parties with respect to the setting of the international calendar. On the contrary, it is being claimed that FIFA have instead proceeded with introducing expanded competitions without any serious justification, most recently of which is the expanded Club World Cup which is expected to kick off in June 2025. In the view of FIFPro and the European Leagues Body, this is to the detriment of the football players who are burdened with the obligation to partake in extra matches in a period which is usually synonymous with their rest period.

In the view of the complainants, FIFA’s intended plans are ultimately to increase the wealth and power of football’s governing body, with little to no regard for the impact that such plans will have on the players involved and on other stakeholders within professional football. Furthermore, the view is that these unilateral and discretionary decisions are not clear, objective, transparent and do not arise out of democratic legal frameworks, which as a result constitute restrictions of competition by object within the meaning of Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). 

This ongoing development will surely be interesting to monitor, both for the sporting world and beyond, especially in light of the recent ruling delivered by the ECJ and the Spanish Commercial Court in the European Super League saga and the soon-to-be expected decision in the Diarra v FIFA case, where in the latter case the Advocate General has opined that some FIFA rules on the transfer of players may prove to be contrary to EU law.

Whilst previously sport related disputes referred to the European courts were far and few between, over the past couple of years an unprecedented amount of sport related disputes have been referred to the ECJ which have been requested to deliver numerous landmark preliminary rulings.