The European Court of Justice ruling on the Super League seeds a new chapter for European football
The Court of Justice of the European Union is set to issue its final ruling on the Super League this Thursday at 09.30. This moment could influence whether the competition project, led by Florentino Pérez and currently backed mainly by Real Madrid and FC Barcelona, moves forward publicly in the years ahead. Yet certainty remains elusive: the decision may not fully close the door on the Super League, nor pave an immediate rollout.
It is important to note that the ruling does not assess the legality of the Super League under European law, nor does it settle the broader dispute. The case centers on a complaint filed by the clubs supporting the project, who argued against potential retaliation by UEFA and FIFA, including sanctions such as bans from competitions or expulsions of players. The matter has been reviewed by Madrid’s Commercial Court No. 17, and proceedings are expected to continue from Thursday as the CJEU evaluates the Spanish court’s preliminary decision. The records from Madrid Commercial Court and the European competition framework are cited here for context.
Nacho and Rüdiger are Real Madrid’s dependable central pairing, supported by data
Fifteen of the twenty-seven judges at the Court of Justice will decide in line with the Spain-based preliminary ruling. The dispute arises from the Super League supporters’ complaint after the project was unveiled to counter measures by UEFA and FIFA, including targeted sanctions on clubs, leagues, and players involved in federated competitions at national and international events. The record references the ECJ case file and the broader European football governance framework for context.
Is the monopoly held by UEFA and FIFA legally sound?
The Super League asserts that UEFA and FIFA abuse their market power by blocking any rival competition outside the two organizations. The statutes of these associations grant them a monopoly over organized football, a claim the Super League argues violates existing antitrust rules under EU competition law. The Spanish court has asked the ECJ to clarify this point, which lies at the heart of Thursday’s anticipated ruling: whether the monopoly can be justified under European competition rules.
A year ago, the court’s general counsel outlined conclusions that largely aligned with the positions of UEFA and FIFA, reflecting the stance taken by those organizations and many national leagues. This is a non-binding set of considerations, but expectations were that the Luxembourg-based court would deliver a final decision in most cases. The cited summary from the Advocate General and the ECJ assessment offer perspective on where the case stands now.
Rantos suggested that the idea of a new global league could be lawful, while noting potential consequences for participants, including possible expulsion from UEFA- and FIFA-governed events. In essence, he found that the rules requiring prior authorization for new competitions align with EU competition law.
A year has passed since the Qatar 2022 final: the World Cup where Messi was celebrated in mythic terms
This ruling would confirm that the two institutions retain a legitimate monopoly over federated football, consistent with EU rules, and that clubs choosing to participate in parallel tournaments risk exclusion from both organizations’ events. The time lag between UEFA and FIFA remains a topic of discussion as the case unfolds. The Super League’s managing body, through its general manager, has continued to push back against the conclusions, with limited success in changing perceptions. The narrative is echoed in EU competition rulings and the World Cup context.
What to expect from the decision?
Industry chatter suggests the CJEU will largely mirror the arguments presented by the Advocate General, though with narrower consequences. If the Court upholds the legality of UEFA’s continental monopoly, the Super League could face more significant blows, given the leadership’s stated stance not to share the European football landscape with other management groups. The project began in April 2021 with twelve top clubs, but pressure from authorities quickly trimmed that list to three principal backers: Real Madrid, Barcelona, and Juventus. Juventus later withdrew, leaving the two Spanish giants as the primary advocates for the concept. In recent months, there have been talks about bringing additional clubs on board, though no lasting commitments have emerged.
Without Bayern and PSG
The plan initially appeared as a near-closed competition, with guaranteed spots for the twelve founders and a few additional clubs. Bayern Munich, Borussia Dortmund, and Paris Saint-Germain did not participate and publicly opposed the venture. The Super League has hinted at a broader format to reward on-field success, though details remain sparse. The organization contends that the tournament should include more teams and treat all participants with equal regard, with claims of distributing substantial funds to support the new system. Critics question the financial and competitive viability of such a model, while supporters emphasize merit-based participation over fixed entry.
The organization’s chief anticipates a format that would host more than sixty teams, signaling a major shift from the traditional top-tier focus. The proposal, if ever fully realized, would change the economics of European club football, raising questions about wealth distribution and competitive balance as discussions continue.