Union Royale Belge des Sociétés de Football Association ASBL v Jean-Marc
Bosman C-415/93 is a 1995 European Court of Justice decision concerning freedom
of movement for workers, freedom of association, and direct effect of
article 39 of the EC Treaty. The case was an important decision on the free
movement of labour and had a profound effect on the transfers of football
players within the European Union. The decision banned restrictions on
foreign EU players within national leagues and allowed players in the EU to
move to another club at the end of a contract without a transfer fee being
paid. The ruling was made in a consolidation
of three separate legal cases, all involving Belgian player Jean-Marc
Bosman: Belgian Football Association v Jean-Marc
Bosman R.F.C. de Liège v Jean-Marc Bosman and
others UEFA v Jean-Marc Bosman
Facts Jean-Marc Bosman was a player for RFC
Liège in the Belgian First Division in Belgium whose contract had expired in
1990. He wanted to change teams and move to Dunkerque, a French team. However,
Dunkerque refused to meet his Belgian club's transfer fee demand, so Liège
refused to let him go. In the meantime, Bosman's wages were
reduced as he was no longer a first-team player. He took his case to the European
Court of Justice in Luxembourg and sued for restraint of trade citing FIFA's
rules regarding football, specifically Article 17.
Judgment On 15 December 1995 the court ruled that
the system, as it was constituted, placed a restriction on the free
movement of workers and was prohibited by Article 39(1) of the EC Treaty of the
Treaty on the functioning of the European Union). Bosman and all other EU
football players were given the right to a free transfer at the end of their
contracts, with the provision that they were transferring from a club within one
EU Association to a club within another EU Association.
Significance Prior to the Bosman ruling, professional
clubs in some parts of Europe were able to prevent players from joining a club
in another country even if their contracts had expired. In the United
Kingdom, Transfer Tribunals had been in place since 1981 to resolve disputes
over fees between clubs when transferring players at the end of their
contracts. The Bosman ruling meant that players could move to a new club at the
end of their contract without their old club receiving a fee. Players can now
agree a pre-contract with another club for a free transfer if the players'
contract with their existing club has six months or less remaining.
The Bosman ruling also prohibited domestic football leagues in EU member
states, and also UEFA, from imposing quotas on foreign players to the extent
that they discriminated against nationals of EU states. At that time,
many leagues placed quotas restricting the number of non-nationals allowed on
member teams. Also, UEFA had a rule that prohibited teams in its competitions,
namely the Champions League, Cup Winners' Cup and UEFA Cup, from naming
more than three "foreign" players in their squads for any game. After the
ruling, quotas could still be imposed, but could only be used to restrict the
number of non-EU players on each team. = Players=
Since the ruling came into effect in all of the EU in 1995, several notable
players in European football have benefited from the ruling. In 1996,
Edgar Davids became Europe's first high-profile player to benefit from the
ruling, when he moved from Ajax to AC Milan. In 1999, Steve McManaman became
the most lucrative transfer at the time in British football, as "Britain’s first
high-profile Bosman departure", when he moved from Liverpool to Real Madrid and
the deal resulted in McManaman once becoming the highest paid British player
in history, for the years 1999 through 2001. Since Davids and McManaman, scores
of other notable players became able to negotiate deals according to their
market value when their contracts expired; a trend that continued into the
2000s and beyond. = Clubs=
The ruling meant that clubs would no longer profit from selling players who
they had helped to develop if they left at the end of their contracts.
The Bosman ruling coincided directly with a new era of financial gains in
football. In 2005, UEFA declared that they were seeking to repair aspects of
the ruling, because it was believed to be the cause of the increasing rich-poor
gap between elite and smaller clubs. = Other cases=
The Bosman ruling was considered and distinguished in Lehtonen, a similar
case which involved a deadline imposed by FIBA after which basketball teams
could not include players who had played for another team in the same season,
where it was found that such a restriction was lawful.
See also Retain and transfer system
Kingaby v Aston Villa, a similar 1912 court case in England
Eastham v Newcastle United, a similar 1963 court case in England
Seitz decision, a similar 1975 arbitration case in the North American
Major League Baseball Kolpak ruling, which extended Bosman to
countries with an associate trading relationship with the EU, most notably
the ACP countries Webster ruling, a post-Bosman ruling
which formalised the 'buy-out' rules for disputed transfers of players still
within their contract term 6+5 rule
Meca-Medina ruling, the ruling that finally decided whether all sports
federations and national leagues were obligated to follow the EU laws
Notes References
External links Text of the ECJ Ruling EUR-Lex,
Publications Office of the European Union
Pearson, Geoff. "The Bosman Case, EU Law and the Transfer System". Football
Industry Group, University of Liverpool. Retrieved 24 January 2008.
"What was the Bosman ruling? The one minute guide". OpenLearn. The Open
University. Retrieved 25 September 2015.