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

Keystone Law—Milena Szuniewicz-Wenzel & Ian Hopkinson

Keystone Law—Milena Szuniewicz-Wenzel & Ian Hopkinson

International arbitration team strengthened by double partner hire

Coodes Solicitors—Pam Johns, Rachel Pearce & Bradley Kaine

Coodes Solicitors—Pam Johns, Rachel Pearce & Bradley Kaine

Firm celebrates trio holding senior regional law society and junior lawyers division roles

Michelman Robinson—Sukhi Kaler

Michelman Robinson—Sukhi Kaler

Partner joins commercial and business litigation team in London

NEWS
The Legal Action Group (LAG)—the UK charity dedicated to advancing access to justice—has unveiled its calendar of training courses, seminars and conferences designed to support lawyers, advisers and other legal professionals in tackling key areas of public interest law
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
Employment law is shifting at the margins. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ this week, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School examines a Court of Appeal ruling confirming that volunteers are not a special legal species and may qualify as ‘workers’
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
back-to-top-scroll