Summary of the European Court ruling on the Super League
The Court of Justice of the European Union delivered a decision concerning FIFA and UEFA. It addressed claims that the dominant bodies blocked the launch of the Super League by threatening sanctions against clubs and players. The ruling marks a notable moment for a project that has attracted global attention and sparked debate about the future of top tier club competitions in European football. The decision signals a shift toward recognizing the potential for private competitions to exist alongside traditional leagues, raising hopes for Florentino Pérez and other backers who have supported the Super League initiative.
The court’s stance contrasts with the prior view of the EU’s chief prosecutor and suggests a path where separate competitions can coexist with established federations. It implies that sanctions against clubs and players involved in third party contests cannot be imposed without a clear regulatory framework that governs such events and ensures transparency, objectivity, and proportionality.
Partial victory for the Super League
The Super League is not extinguished. The essence of the ruling lies in noting that UEFA and FIFA cannot veto third party competitions on a whim. Instead, they must develop a regulatory framework that outlines the criteria for authorizing these events and that guarantees fair competition and non discrimination.
Association football retains some upper hand, but the Super League remains a rising force, built from past challenges and now pursuing a longer legal course before any final outcome. It is possible that UEFA and FIFA could craft rules that allow similar leagues to operate alongside existing tournaments, but any such decision would ultimately rest with the courts.
While UEFA and FIFA argued for sport as a protected social and physical activity under European law, the Court focused on the economic aspects of the activity and judged the case through that lens.
Reaction from LaLiga to the ruling: a call for restraint
The reaction from LaLiga described the Super League as a selfish and elitist model, urging a halt to its advancement. The exchange underscores the tension between new competition formats and the established order that governs European football.
Details of the ruling
The Court states that organizing club football competitions and handling broadcasting rights are economic activities. As such, they must comply with competition rules and the free movement of services and goods. While sport has unique characteristics, including associations with regulatory and sanctioning powers, the ruling emphasizes economic considerations within a broader framework.
In the judge’s view, when a dominant actor can set the terms for potential rivals to enter the market, there is a risk of conflict of interest. This must be balanced with transparent, objective, non-discriminatory, and proportionate criteria. The report notes that FIFA and UEFA did not apply such criteria consistently, leading to strong critiques of their dominant position.
Approval or not: what the ruling means for the Super League
The CJEU decision is binding but does not automatically authorize the Super League. It cautions that the ruling does not settle the question of future approvals; it only calls for procedural rules that ensure transparent processes when third party competitions are considered. The court urges UEFA and FIFA to implement regulatory procedures that allow private leagues to operate outside federation control, while maintaining clear safeguards.
The ruling mirrors years of legal contention and signals a potential path for private competitions to exist alongside federated structures, subject to appropriate governance and oversight.
Context and current landscape
The Super League project emerged in April 2021 as a closed competition backed by twelve leading clubs. After swift and widespread opposition from football authorities, governments, and fans, most clubs withdrew. In recent developments, Juventus stepped back, leaving Real Madrid and FC Barcelona as the remaining proponents of the venture. A22 CEO Bernd Reichart has discussed future formats that could involve a broader pool of clubs, with national leagues still serving as the basis for sporting merit.
European football institutions and many governments have positioned themselves against the private league concept. The ruling suggests a continued emphasis on integrating new formats within an accepted regulatory framework rather than discarding all private competition ideas entirely. The debate persists across leagues and federations alike.
Next steps and the legal path ahead
The case will return to the Madrid court system for continued proceedings, guided by the CJEU’s advisory conclusions. Interim measures restricting retaliation against involved clubs were previously issued but are subject to ongoing judicial review. The decision elevates the conversation about how private competitions should be treated within the European sporting ecosystem, inviting thoughtful policy design and legal clarity.