This Thursday, the 15th, the Attorney General in charge of the Superliga case at the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) will issue a non-binding opinion on whether UEFA has abused its position in football and whether there is a monopoly that may be contrary. Community free competition rules of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU (Articles 101 and 102). A important decision because behind it the contradiction arises about whether UEFA abused its power by opposing the establishment of the Super League.
The Attorney General, an expert judge acting as counsel on the matter entrusted to him by the CJEU, will issue a legal and non-binding opinion of limited relevance. After publication, the issue goes to a commission of 15 judges, who will meet in the Grand Chamber of the CJEU. The 15 judges deliberate and eventually impose a sentence, which will be known within a period of four to six months (before the summer of 2023). In 76% of cases, the Court’s decision coincided with the Attorney General’s decision.
From May 2021 to summer 2023
It all started when the 17th Commercial Court of Madrid conducted a six-question bias question at the request of Real Madrid, Barça and Juventus, which filed the legal claim in Madrid in May 2021. Oral hearings of the parties concerned were held at the CJEU in Luxembourg for two days last July. Including up to 20 EU member states. Javier Tebas’ LaLiga and Luis Rubiales’ RFEF agreed on their stance on this issue. When the Madrid court receives the CJUE’s decision, it will make its decision, which would normally go along the same lines, and an appeal can be made to the Supreme Court against this decision. Since the process started in Spain, the trial must end here.
The Super League is a competition in which it takes place. It was reported that JP Morgan contributed 3,500 million euros, which money was initially distributed by the 12 clubs registered in the formation of this closed competition.. This has resulted in federations and countries facing frontlines, and even a change of direction, including in some places where the sports meritocracy will decide. When English clubs and Atlético withdrew due to pressure from fans and UEFA, JP Morgan rejected $3,500 million in investment for the project.
Padel and golf
Should the Attorney General decide on the monopoly and a legal framework that allows the Super League dispute emerges, the competitive pattern imposed by PSG and ECA president Nasser Al-Khelaifi himself could be replicated in the paddle tennis world. Or LIV Golf, also known as the Super Golf League, founded by the Saudi Arabian Public Investment Fund, with prizes and fees for golfers ten times those received in the PGA.
During this period until the decision of the Legal Spokesperson is learned, Florentino took the opportunity to enlarge the structure of A22 Spor Management, the organizer of the Super League. First signed as CEO Bernd Reichart Appointed former head of investment and now sole director at Antena 3 Luis Lezama-Leguizamon Aranduy He is the grandson of Manuel de Lezama-Leguizamón y Zuazola, former vice president of Banco Bilbao Vizcaya. Florentino and Laporta, along with Athletic, share their preliminary opposition in LaLiga according to an agreement they have signed with CVC Capital Partners for the next 50 years. And Athletic is now headed by Jon Uriarte, son of Pedro Luis Uriarte, a former vice chairman of the BBV Board of Directors.
Laghrari, Florentino’s ‘partner’
The three clubs refused to sign the agreement and offered an alternative financing route, with a 25-year loan of €2,000 million led by investment banks JP Morgan, Bank of America and HSBC and coordinated with the signing of the Key Capital Partners investment. , led by banker Anas Laghrari. And it corresponds to Laghrari is with John Hahn, owner of A22 Sports Management, former dictator of the American Providence fund in Spain. 50% belongs to the company that supports the Florentino Super League.
Moreover, Laghrari also appears in other Florentino-related asset operations. In 2017, Key Capital donated close to 15,000 million to ACS (through its German subsidiary Hochtief) in the Abertis attack. The operation where Laghrari acted as a financial advisor to the construction company. The banker was part of the team that intervened on behalf of Florentino in the selection of Bank of America Merrill Lynch and JP Morgan to contribute to the initial 575 million euros under which the restructuring of the Bernabéu began.