header-logo header-logo

07 November 2025 / Dr Estelle Ivanova
Issue: 8138 / Categories: Features , Profession , Sports law , Arbitration , International , EU , Competition , Public
printer mail-detail

RFC Seraing v FIFA: Final score?

235029
The whistle has blown on RFC Seraing v FIFA, in which sports arbitration was pitted against EU competition law: Dr Estelle Ivanova explains the result at full time
  • In RFC Seraing v FIFA, the Belgian football club challenged sanctions imposed by FIFA in relation to third-party ownership rules, arguing that the rules are incompatible with EU law.
  • The Court of Justice of the European Union held that Court of Arbitration for Sport awards are legally binding, and that they may indeed be reviewed by EU member state courts, but only where such awards relate to matters of EU public policy.
  • The judgment was unequivocal: the full effectiveness of EU law takes precedence, even over the cherished doctrines of res judicata and procedural autonomy.

The long-awaited judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in the case of RFC Seraing v FIFA (Case C-600/23) was handed down on 1 August 2025. The case posed the delicate question:

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
An indemnity costs battle with a £20m gap could reopen an important question: what weight should an approved budget carry?
back-to-top-scroll