WRITTEN QUESTION E-0434/96 by Freddy Blak (PSE) to the Commission (29 February 1996)

Subject: Ban on individual sponsorships in Danish football

The Danish Football Union (DBU) has published an agreement covering the period from 1 January 1996 to 30 June 1998 which sets out the terms to be accepted by Danish football players if they wish to play for the national team. The agreement stipulates that a national team player, even if included only once in the national squad, may not at any time during the said period conclude personal advertising agreements for products described as being of a similar nature to those of the DBU's sponsors (Den danske Mejerier). Such products include 'beverages of any kind'. Marketing experts say the ban thus covers about 40% of the personal sponsorships market.

Given that national team players are not employed by the DBU (but by their respective clubs), to what extent is the DBU in breach of EU competition rules by binding players to the agreement on a worldwide basis, 365 days a year, and hence even when they are not playing for the national team?

It should be recalled that, with its judgment in the Bosman case, the European Court of Justice has already signalled clearly to national football federations that they must respect professional footballers' individual rights. In view of this, the binding of even 'borderline' members of the national team to an agreement by the DBU is at best unnecessary and foolish, and at worst incompatible with EU competition rules.

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission (29 March 1996)

It may be that the Danish Football Union ban on individual sponsorships for Danish footballers who are in the national squad constitutes a restriction of competition.

The restrictive behaviour of the professional clubs or their representative organizations with regard to Articles 85 and 86 of the EC Treaty can be assessed only with full knowledge of the facts as viewed in their economic and legal context as well as of the distinctive features of the sector and the definition of the relevant market. The Commission has not as yet examined any situations similar to that described by the Honourable Member.

Accordingly, it is only if the Commission looks into the matter in full knowledge of the facts that it will be able to provide a detailed answer to questions of this kind.

At any event, the Honourable Member's attention is drawn to the fact that the judgment in the Bosman case relates to the individual rights of players as workers. The question put by the Honourable Member relates to an economic activity carried on by the players themselves. For such an activity, they could, therefore, be regarded as undertakings within the meaning of Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty.