FIFA and UEFA acted illegally in blocking the creation of the European Super League (ESL), the European Union’s top court has ruled.
The court had been asked to decide whether the two bodies acted against competition law with its rules which stopped the formation of the league in 2021 and then by seeking to sanction the clubs involved.
The European Court Of Justice said that such rules were “contrary to EU law, contrary to competition law and the freedom to provide services”, adding that FIFA and UEFA were abusing their dominant position in football.
The court’s ruling does not mean that a competition such as the ESL must necessarily be approved.
Judges added the court “does not rule on that specific project in its judgement”.
However, the ruling does bring fresh life into the proposals, which were thought to have been on hold after receiving widespread backlash from fans and clubs.
Its backers relaunched the Super League on Thursday after the judgment, proposing a three-tiered league and cup competition with teams from across Europe.
More on European Super League
Related Topics:
The original proposal for the league, involving 12 of Europe’s biggest clubs including six English teams, collapsed shortly after it was announced in April 2021, sparking widespread condemnation.
Manchester United, Liverpool, Arsenal, Tottenham Hotspur, Chelsea and Manchester City were forced to pull out amid a furious backlash from rivals, fans and politicians.
Advertisement
‘Football is free’ – how does new ESL proposal work?
A22 Sports Management, the European commercial sports development company behind the ESL, said its new proposal for the league for both the men’s and women’s game was more open, based on merit and would feature promotion and relegation – addressing criticisms levelled at the 2021 plan.
The proposal for the men’s game involves the following: • A 64-team European competition system; • The top two leagues will be known as the Star League and Gold League – potential replacements for the Champions League and Europa League; • The Star and Gold league will have 16 teams each; • The bottom league will be known as the Blue League; • Promotion into the bottom league will come from domestic leagues only, implying teams locked in the top two leagues would be hard to remove.
A22 also announced its intention to change the way fans watch football. It proposed a project called Unify, which would allow fans to watch every single game of the new competition on one platform, for free.
“This proposal has been shaped with the input of clubs with all sizes,” Bernd Reichart, the chief executive of A22 Sports, said in a statement.
A22 Sports initially challenged FIFA and UEFA’s right to block the formation of the ESL and impose sanctions on competing clubs in the courts.
The firm argued football’s international and European governing bodies have an unfair monopoly and market dominance on the running of club competitions.
After the ruling, Mr Reichart said in a statement posted on X: “We have won the #RightToCompete. The UEFA-monopoly is over. Football is FREE.
“Clubs are now free from the threat of sanction AND free to determine their own futures.”
Based on results from a fan-led government review, the regulator will also implement a licensing system for all clubs from the Premier League down to the National League.
Today, the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport, said it “stands by” its decision to create a new independent regulator for English football.
“We will shortly be bringing forward legislation that makes this a reality, and will stop clubs from joining any similar breakaway competitions in the future,” a spokesperson said.
What does the ruling mean for English football clubs?
In reaction to the European Court Of Justice’s (ECJ) ruling today, the UK government has said it plans to bring forward plans for a new independent regulator for English football.
The regulator will be given the power to stop English football clubs from joining new competitions that “harm the domestic game” – and a summary of the proposals said it would “safeguard against a future European Super League-style breakaway league”.
In effect, the regulator would prevent British clubs from joining the breakaway competition.
In addition, because the UK has now left the European Union, the clubs would not be able to appeal against this decision to the EU’s top court.
Plan ‘selfish and elitist’ – but two big clubs back it
In a damning view on the league, Spain’s LaLiga – the Spanish equivalent of the Premier League – called the breakaway competition “selfish and elitist” after the court ruling.
But its top two clubs – Real Madrid and Barcelona – remain enthusiastic backers of the rival project.
Real Madrid’s president, Florentino Perez, hailed the court ruling as a “great day for football and sports”.
Mr Perez was one of the leading figures in the breakaway competition, alongside Barcelona’s Joan Laporta Estruch.
X
This content is provided by X, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable X cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to X cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow X cookies for this session only.
In a video statement posted on X, Mr Estruch said: “We believe that the time has come for clubs and those who are owned by their members to have greater control over their destiny, over their future, over their sustainability.
“The new Super League format is not intended to go against the Spanish league, not against the national league. On the contrary, with an improved European competition and more resources for the clubs, the national leagues will become more balanced and competitive.”
The views of LaLiga’s two biggest clubs were in stark contrast to those of football fan network, Football Supporters Europe (FSE), who maintain any plans to form the ESL continue to “endanger the future” of European football.
“Whatever comes next, the Super League remains an ill-conceived project that endangers the future of European football. FSE, our members, and fans across Europe will continue to fight it,” the group said in a statement.
UEFA ‘committed to uphold the European football pyramid’
Reacting on Thursday, UEFA said it takes note of the European court’s judgment, but said it does not signify an “endorsement or validation of the so-called super league”.
The body said it remains “resolute in its commitment to uphold the European football pyramid” and in ensuring that it continues to serve the “broader interests of society”.
“We trust that the solidarity-based European football pyramid that the fans and all stakeholders have declared as their irreplaceable model will be safeguarded against the threat of breakaways by European and national laws,” UEFA said.
The binding ruling will now be referred back to the Madrid commercial court, which adjudicates legal corporate disputes, where a Spanish judge ruled teams should not be punished for their involvement in the ESL.
The Post Office is drawing up plans to close dozens of branches and axe hundreds of head office jobs as it tries to place its finances on a sustainable long-term footing.
Sky News has learnt that the state-owned company is preparing to announce in the coming days that it will shut or seek alternative franchising arrangements for more than 100 wholly owned branches.
The affected branches collectively employ close to 1,000 people and are said to be significantly loss-making.
A significant number of jobs – believed to be in excess of 1,000 – are also understood to be at risk at the Post Office’s headquarters. Further details of where the axe would fall were unclear on Tuesday afternoon.
Whitehall insiders said that the government had been consulted on the plans, which come as ministers explore the possibility of handing ownership of the network to thousands of sub-postmasters across Britain.
They added that union officials had also been briefed on the proposals, with one suggesting that an announcement could come as early as Wednesday or Thursday.
The cost-cutting measures are said to be designed to help the Post Office stem substantial financial losses, with the company requiring an annual government subsidy to stay afloat.
More on Post Office Scandal
Related Topics:
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:12
Ministers to mutualise Post Office
One government source said the plans should be seen in the context of comments made by Jonathan Reynolds, the business secretary, on Monday at the public inquiry into the Horizon IT scandal.
Giving evidence, Mr Reynolds said: “I think despite the scale of this scandal, the Post Office is still an incredibly important institution in national life.
Advertisement
“I look at the business model of the Post Office, and I think even accounting for the changes in the core services that are provided … there’s still a whole range of services that are really important.
“But I don’t think postmasters make sufficient remuneration from what the public want from the Post Office, and I think that’s going to require some very significant changes to the overall business model of the Post Office.”
Improvements to the pay and working practices of sub-postmasters are expected to be announced imminently, the government source added.
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
The 364 year-old institution has been engulfed in crisis since the scale of the Horizon scandal became clear, with hundreds of sub-postmasters wrongly prosecuted for theft and fraud offences.
Brought to a wider public audience by the ITV drama ‘Mr Bates vs The Post Office’, it has been labelled Britain’s biggest miscarriage of justice.
Many of those affected suffered ill health, marital breakdowns or died before they were exonerated.
Former chief executive Paula Vennells, who insisted for years that the Horizon system was robust, was effectively stripped of her damehood in disgrace earlier this year.
Last month, Sky News revealed that the Department for Business and Trade (DBT) has asked BCG, the management consultancy, to examine options for mutualising the Post Office.
BCG’s work is expected to include assessing the viability of turning the Post Office into an employee-owned mutual, a model which is used by the John Lewis Partnership.
The Post Office is Britain’s biggest retail network, with roughly 11,500 branches, with the public’s shareholding managed by UK Government Investments (UKGI).
In recent months, calls for a review of the company’s ownership model have grown amid a corporate governance fiasco at the company.
In January, Henry Staunton, the chairman, was sacked by Kemi Badenoch, the then business secretary.
Mr Staunton subsequently disclosed an investigation into bullying claims against Nick Read, the Post Office’s chief executive, which the organisation said in April had exonerated him.
Mr Read, who has since resigned, was accused of constant attempts to secure pay rises, even as sub-postmasters were facing protracted delays to their entitlement to compensation after being wrongfully convicted.
As part of their efforts to repair the Post Office’s battered finances and reputation, the government has parachuted in Nigel Railton, a former boss of National Lottery operator Camelot, as its chairman.
A Post Office spokesperson said: “We will set out a “new deal” for postmasters and the future of the Post Office as an organisation.
“It will dramatically increase postmasters’ share of revenues, strengthen our branch network and make it work better for local communities, independent postmasters and our partners who own and operate branches.”
The UK’s jobless rate has risen by more than expected, raising questions over whether the new government’s early warnings on the state of the economy have backfired.
Official figures from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) showed the unemployment rate at 4.3% over the three months to September.
That was higher than the 4.1% figure expected by economists and up on the 4% reported a month earlier.
The data also showed that average regular earnings growth had fallen to its lowest level since April-June 2002, easing to 4.8% from 4.9%, though it continued to outstrip the pace of inflation.
Wider figures showed a fall, of 5,000, in the numbers in payrolled employment during the month of September.
Commentators on the economy suggested that the jobless rate figure could be a blip – a consequence of continuing poor engagement with the ONS Labour Force Survey which collects the information.
More from Money
They also said that the earnings growth rate – a key concern of the Bank of England’s in the inflation battle – was propped up only by public sector pay rises, suggesting that private sector awards were continuing to ease.
However, others said there could have been an influence from the new government’s claims, since late July, of a dire economic inheritance including a £22bn black hole in the public finances.
Advertisement
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:40
July: Chancellor outlines ‘black hole’
Both Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and his chancellor, Rachel Reeves, stated widely during the election campaign their priority was boosting economic growth through a new partnership with business.
But they warned within weeks of taking office of “tough” decisions ahead, while taking some immediate action including cutting the universal winter fuel payment.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:26
‘Mini fiscal event was unnecessary’
A budget was slated for 30 October.
That first major fiscal event for Labour in 14 years, delivered three months after the gloomy messages first emanated from Downing Street, prompted a business backlash as it put employers firmly on the hook for part of a £40bn additional tax take.
The private sector has since warned that the measures, which include hikes to national insurance contributions by employers, will hit investment, hiring and pay awards, leaving all the talk of partnership with the government in serious doubt.
Danni Hewson, AJ Bell’s head of financial analysis, said of the ONS data: “This latest set of jobs data puts in black and white what businesses and workers have been feeling… Over the last few weeks, businesses have been warning that the increase in national insurance coupled with another chunky hike in the national living wage could result in job cuts.
“Even before the budget, uncertainty about what taxes might rise eroded confidence and many employers pushed back investment decisions or halted hiring plans until they could assess the road ahead.”
Isaac Stell, investment manager at Wealth Club, said: “A pickup in the unemployment rate may start to ring alarm bells in the halls of Westminster as the rate for September exceeded expectations by some margin.
“This increase serves as a warning sign to the government following on from the budget where businesses saw a large increase in the level of national insurance contributions they will have to pay.
“If these additional costs restrict hiring and cause jobs to be lost, its so-called growth agenda will be further scrutinised,” he wrote.
Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall said of the pay data: “While it’s encouraging to see real pay growth this month, more needs to be done to improve living standards too.
“So, from April next year, over three million of the lowest-paid workers will benefit from our increase to the national living wage.”
Shell has won its appeal against a climate court ruling that it must sharply reduce its carbon emissions.
The oil and gas producer went to the Court of Appeal in the Netherlands following a decision in support of environmental campaign groups in the country, including Friends Of The Earth.
That ruling, in 2021, ordered Shell to cut its carbon emissions by 45% by 2030 compared to 2019 levels in order to protect Dutch citizens.
The emissions curbs included those caused by the use of Shell’s products.
The judge in the appeal dismissed all the claims against Shell.
The company, which exited its dual headquarters structure in The Hague in 2022 to reside only in the UK, had argued that the original district court decision was flawed on many grounds.
More from Money
They included that only nation states can set such sweeping demands and that such a cut to its business would only shift output towards its competitors without any benefit to the planet.
The ruling was handed down as the COP29 climate summit is staged in Azerbaijan and just months after Shell weakened a 2030 carbon reduction target and scrapped a 2035 objective, citing expectations for strong gas demand and uncertainty in the energy transition.
Advertisement
Tuesday’s judgment may not be the end of the matter.
The climate groups, which saw the case as a human rights issue, have the option to bring their own appeal to the Netherlands’ Supreme Court.
The only boost to their legal fight came from the court agreeing with the activists that Shell had an obligation to cut its greenhouse gas emissions to protect people from global warming.
The appeal court, in its findings, added however that the company was on its way to meet required targets for its own emissions though it was unclear if demands on it to reduce emissions caused by the use of its products would help the fight against climate change.
Shell chief executive, Wael Sawan, responded: “We are pleased with the court’s decision, which we believe is the right one for the global energy transition, the Netherlands and our company.
“Our target to become a net-zero emissions energy business by 2050 remains at the heart of Shell’s strategy and is transforming our business. This includes continuing our work to halve emissions from our operations by 2030.
“We are making good progress in our strategy to deliver more value with less emissions.”
Friends of the Earth director in the Netherlands Donald Pols said of the ruling “This hurts.
“At the same time, we see that this case has ensured that major polluters are not immune and has further stimulated the debate about their responsibility in combating dangerous climate change.
“That is why we continue to tackle major polluters, such as Shell.”