Today it was the lime. Or the sand one, depending on who is looking at it. The Spanish Justice changes criteria for the third time in the ‘Superliga case’. The Provincial Court of Madrid has agreed reactivate the precautionary measures requested by the promoters of the competitionwhich prevent UEFA and FIFA from retaliating against the clubs involved in them, currently Real Madrid, Barcelona and Juventus.
The Provincial Court thus revokes the order issued in April by Judge Sofía Gil, head of Commercial Court number 17 in Madrid. Then, the judge revoked the precautionary measures adopted in first instancein April 2021, for the person who was then the head, on a substitution basis, of that court, Judge Manuel Ruiz de Lara.
The ruling handed down by Judges Gregorio Plaza, Rafael Fuentes and Enrique Garcíawho acts as a speaker, assumes the majority of the theses of the Super League on the alleged abuse of a dominant position made by UEFA and FIFA, and shows a total disagreement with what was decided in the first instance by the Commercial Court that is investigating the case.
“In view of the evidence that has been made available to us, it does not seem to us that the defendants’ mode of conduct can be justified as protecting the general interests of European football, but that what we warn is an action that has all the characteristics of an unjustifiable abuse by someone who holds a position of dominance“, reproach the judges in the sentence handed down this Monday.
Harsh argument against UEFA and FIFA
The Provincial Court of Madrid justifies the reactivation of the precautionary measures requested by the Super League due to the danger that it may pose to the final viability of the competition, if it were to be established: “Its competitive initiative has already been interfered with by the obstative conduct of the defendant [UEFA y FIFA]. The risk that this could be repeated, discouraging third parties from relating to the plaintiff, or that it may be taken to even more burdensome stages during the development of the litigation (because it could lead to disciplinary proceedings with monetary sanctions, suspensions or expulsions)reveals the existence of danger due to delay”.
“We notice indications of the commission by the defendants of actions to hinder the establishment of a competitor within the relevant market, which is that of the organization of international professional football competitions on the European continent. The conduct is particularly Serious because who the obstruction comes from is from entities that, apparently, have been holding the monopoly in that market up to now and that they take advantage of their position of dominance to tie up an initiative coming from the one who intends to become their competitor“, adds the sentence to which he has had access THE SPANISH NEWSPAPERfrom the Iberian Press group.
Criticism of the monopoly position of UEFA and FIFA focuses on the motivations that lead the magistrates to make their decision: “The monopoly is being exercised by private entities that claim the power to decide who should be able to operate in the organization of international professional soccer competitions in Europe and that have shown, with acts such as those that motivate this litigation, a design contrary to having to share even a portion of it with whoever aspires to be a competitor”.
waiting for europe
He also qualifies as a “feeble excuse” the justification that UEFA and FIFA protect with their position “the European sports model”: “It is not directly concerned with the activity that concerns us here, neither the grassroots nor the fans, nor are the rights at stake.” ethical principles that should guide them”.
Related news
This sentence comes a month and a half after the General Counsel of the European Union issued an unfavorable opinion for the Super League in its complaint for the alleged monopoly position that, in the opinion of the three clubs involved, UEFA and FIFA exercise over the european soccer.
This opinion, requested by the Spanish Justice, is not binding, although the Court of Justice of the European Union tends to issue a sentence in line with the criteria of the General Counsel. That matter, the most important of this battle, will be resolved on March 15.