EC Law and Professional Football: Bosman and its Implications
| Published date | 01 November 1996 |
| Date | 01 November 1996 |
| Author | P. E. Morris,P. M. Spink,S. Morrow |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.1996.tb02701.x |
EC
Law and Professional Football:
Bosman
and its
Implications
P.E.
Morris,*
S.
Morrow**
and
P.M.
Spink***
Jean-Marc Bosman is a Belgian national who was formerly a professional football
player with the Belgian club RC Libge under a contract which ran until
30
June
1990.
Prior to expiry of his contract, Libge offered Bosman a new contract which
included
a
massive reduction (almost
75
per cent) of total salary which would have
placed him on the minimum salary permitted by the URBSFA, the Belgian football
governing body. Bosman, however, eventually attracted attention from the French
club Dunkerque, and a transfer fee
was
agreed between Libge and Dunkerque.
Unfortunately, the proposed transfer eventually collapsed due to the failure of a
clearance certificate from the URBSFA to
arrive
at the French Football Federation
in time and doubts as to Dunkerque’s ability to pay the transfer fee.
Subsequently, Bosman was only able to obtain employment with
a
Belgian Third
Division club amid suspicion, following his decision to mount a challenge to the
lawfulness in EC law of football transfer fees for out of contract player? and
restrictions on the number of foreign players which can
be
selected in a team, that
he was ‘boycotted by all European clubs who could have taken him in.’* Bosman’s
case underwent
a
protracted journey through the Belgian legal system, eventually
reaching the Appeal Court in Libge where he sought financial compensation from
Libge, URBSFA and UEFA, together with a declaration that URBSFA and UEFA
rules on transfer of players and participation of foreign players were inapplicable to
him. The Appeal Court opted to exercise its power under Article
177
of the EC
Treaty to refer the matter to the European Court for a preliminary ruling. The terms
of its reference were as follows:
Are Articles
48,
85
and
86
of the [EC Treaty] to be interpreted as:
(i) prohibiting a football club from requiring and receiving payment of a sum of
money upon the engagement of one of its players who has come to the end
of his contract by
a
new employing club;
(ii) prohibiting the national and international sporting associations
or
federations
from including in their respective regulations provisions restricting access of
foreign players from the European Community to the competitions which
they ~rganize?~
What follows is a brief account of the European Court’s response and an
assessment of its implications for the professional football industry in the UK,
especially clubs’ accounting policies in respect of treatment of players as assets,
and possible new legal challenges to the domestic transfer
fee
system.
*Senior Lecturer in Business Law, University of Stirling.
**Lecturer in Accountancy and Finance, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh.
1
Case C415/93,
URESFA
v
Jean-Marc
Eosmon
[
19961
All
ER
(EC)
97
(ECJ
and Advocate General
Lenz).
2
Advocate General’s Opinion, para
47
(hereafter Opinion).
3
European
Court’s
Judgment, para
49
(hereafter Judgment).
***Lecturer in Business Law, University
of
Stirling.
893
Q
The Modern Law Review Limited
1996
(MLR
596,
November). Published by Blackwell Publishers,
108
Cowley Road, Oxford OX4
IJF
and
238
Main Street, Cambridge,
MA
02142,
USA.
To continue reading
Request your trial