Free article section

You are reading a Free article. Apply for a subscription to access all the valuable information on the website Sports Law & Taxation

Formula One: EU Competition Law woes continue!

By Tom Serby Anglia Ruskin Law School, Cambridge, UK   On 28 September, 2015, a complaint into the running of Formula One (F1), alleging that it infringes EU competition law, was filed with the EU Competition Commission by two of the smallest F1 teams, Force India and Sauber. F1 is, of course, no stranger to EU Competition Law! Fifteen years ago, (Case COMP/35.613 and Case COMP/36.638), the Commission concluded that the sport’s regulatory body, FIA, had abused its dominant position in the sport and limited free competition by restricting unnecessarily the freedom of circuit owners, drivers and teams, and promoters to engage in events and enter into commercial contracts with broadcasters. As a result of those Cases, FIA agreed to divest itself of its business activities in order to safeguard its independence as a regulator. Broadcasting and commercial rights were transferred to a commercial rights holder under a 100 year agreement, and Bernie Ecclestone, F1’s chief executive, left FIA to commercialise and exploit these rights. The crux of the current EU Competition Law complaint is that five teams - Red Bull, Mercedes, McLaren, Ferrari and Williams - receive guaranteed special payments of a combined amount of £155 million, from the private equity group that controls F1, CVC Capital Partners (CVC). The complaint alleges that Bernie Ecclestone’s F1 group of companies, controlled by CVC, has a dominant position in motor racing, which is abused and leads to distortion of competition through these guaranteed payments (which amount to a majority of F1’s total prize money). A further allegation is that the five teams benefitting from the guaranteed payments unfairly dominate the proceedings of the sport’s core decision making ‘strategy group’. Ecclestone was reported today (30 September, 2015) as saying that F1 was open to renegotiating the mechanism through which the £550 million F1 annual prize money was allocated between teams. However, Ferrari President, Sergio Marchionne, was quoted as saying there was “limited scope” for the Commission to intervene, since the payment agreements with all the F1 teams were transparent and a matter of freely negotiated contracts. Sport is, of course, subject to EU Competition Law and sports governing bodies must be able to demonstrate (under the Meca Medina/Wouters principle) that their ‘sporting rules’ are proportionate and justified, if they can be shown to be having an effect on competition. The performance ‘on the paddock’ of F1 teams, just as in other sports, depends heavily on the amount of financial investment that they receive, and sporting rules that restrict or control investment in sport are currently a contested issue. EU Competition Law has been invoked against sports governing bodies (largely unsuccessfully) in 2015 on two previous occasions, in both cases before Courts of First Instance in Belgium, in challenges respectively to UEFA’s Financial Fair Play Regulations (see GSLTR web posts of 1 & 27 July, 2015) and, on the second occasion, in a complaint about the potentially anti-competitive effect of FIFA’s regulations banning third party ownership of footballers (see GSLTR web post of 29 July, 2015). In both cases, the rules had a justifiable end, preserving a sound financial basis among top flight football clubs, and preventing the possibility of collusive manipulation of competitions between opposing teams, respectively. It will be interesting to see how F1 seeks to defend what are prima facie an anti-competitive agreement and an abuse of dominance, but it is perhaps telling that the Commission, no stranger to F1, did not independently launch its own investigation!  

Issues of the Journal

Interesting article?

Take your own subscription to get easy online access to all valuable articles of Sports Law & Taxation
The Journal

Sports Law & Taxation features: articles; comparative surveys; commentaries on topical sports legal and tax issues and documentation.

The unique feature of Sports Law & Taxation is that this Journal combines  up-to-date valuable and must-have information on the legal and tax aspects of sport and their interrelationships.

Global Sports Law and Taxation Reports feature: articles; comparative surveys; commentaries on topical sports legal and tax issues and documentation.

The unique feature of Global Sports Law and Taxation Reports is that this Journal combines for the first time up to-date valuable and must-have information on the legal and tax aspects of sport and their interrelationships.

The Editors

The editors of  the Journal Sports Law & Taxation are Professor Ian Blackshaw and Dr Rijkele Betten, with specialist contributions from the world's leading practitioners and academics in the sports law and taxation fields.

The Editors

Managing editor
Dr. Rijkele Betten

Consulting editor
Prof. Dr. Ian S. Blackshaw

Editorial board

Prof. Guglielmo Maisto
Maisto e Associati, Milano

Mr. Kevin Offer
Hardwick & Morris LLP, London


In partnership with

Screenshot 1



Nolot BV
St. Jorisstraat 11
5211 HA  's-Hertogenosch
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.