The CJEU examines the FIFA agents' regulations (C-209/23, RRC Sports): collusion, abuse of dominance, free provision of services and GDPR

The Court of Justice of the European Union handed down on 16 July 2026 its judgment in case C-209/23, RRC Sports, on the compatibility with Union law of FIFA's rules on agents. The dispute arose in Germany: two football players' agents brought an action for cessation before a German court seeking a prohibition on the application of several FIFA rules regulating the exercise of the activity of players' and coaches' agents, relating to agents' remuneration - in particular its maximum limit calculated as a percentage -, to the requirements for obtaining and maintaining the FIFA licence and to the communication of information to FIFA, to other agents, to clubs and to leagues. The agents considered that those rules infringed the prohibitions of collusive practices and of abuses of dominant position, the freedom to provide services and the General Data Protection Regulation.

The subject of the dispute: three groups of contested rules

The rules challenged by the agents fall into three blocks, according to the Court's press release. The first affects agents' remuneration, in particular its maximum limit calculated as a percentage of the amount of the transactions. The second refers to the requirements for obtaining and maintaining the FIFA licence needed to exercise the activity. The third concerns the communication of certain information to FIFA, to other agents, to clubs and to leagues. On those three fronts the agents asked for the application of the rules to be prohibited, considering that they breached Union law.

The procedural route chosen is relevant: an action for cessation before a German court, which referred to the Court of Justice a preliminary question on the validity of the federation's rules in light of competition law, internal-market freedoms and the GDPR.

Collusive practices: one incompatible rule

According to the Court's own press release, the judgment leaves it to the national court to assess whether the contested rules are contrary to the prohibition of collusive practices or whether they may benefit from an exemption. But the Court of Justice sets a clear point of law: the rule prohibiting agents from certain conduct, specifying that this prohibition does not apply to agents already bound by an exclusive representation contract, is incompatible with the prohibition of collusive practices.

FIFA's dominant position

As regards the prohibition of abuses of dominant position, the Court points out that FIFA may be considered to hold a dominant position in the market for agents' services for the transfer of players. On that basis, it is for the national court, with the criteria provided by the Court of Justice, to determine whether the contested rules constitute an abuse of that position and, where appropriate, whether the conduct can be justified.

Free provision of services: obstacles identified

The judgment identifies obstacles to the freedom to provide services in several FIFA rules, among them those making the grant of the agent's licence conditional on the requirement that agents have not been subject to certain criminal measures. On the rules requiring agents to submit to FIFA's rules and, by default, to Swiss law, as well as to the jurisdiction of FIFA, of the member federations and of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), the Court qualifies: they can only constitute a restriction on the freedom to provide services if the rules thereby made applicable to agents may deter them from exercising their activity.

The Court recalls, however, that the assessment of justification falls to the national court, which must weigh objectives such as the fight against abusive practices by agents and the guarantee of a higher level of protection for agents' clients and for agents themselves, through a uniform legal framework accompanied by an enforcement mechanism.

GDPR: the publication of sanctions, in question

The data-protection chapter contains one of the clearest conclusions. After recalling that the GDPR only regulates certain processing and leaving it to the national judge to assess whether the communication of information to FIFA is necessary for the satisfaction of legitimate interests, the Court declares that the GDPR precludes the disclosure and publication, by a federation such as FIFA, of every sanction imposed on agents or on their clients and of the detailed information on all those transactions.

The justification objectives the national judge must weigh

The press release lists the objectives that the national court must weigh when assessing the justification of the obstacles to the freedom to provide services: the fight against abusive practices by agents and the guarantee of a higher level of protection for agents' clients and for agents themselves, through the establishment of a uniform legal framework accompanied by an enforcement mechanism. The judgment does not, therefore, close the debate on the proportionality of the rules: it sets the framework and refers the final assessment, rule by rule, to the German judge.

This method - declaration of European principles and referral back to the referring judge - is characteristic of the preliminary-ruling procedure and requires following the German litigation to know the concrete fate of each rule of the agents' regulations.

Relevance for sports law

The judgment frames FIFA's agents' regulations in the field of competition law and internal-market freedoms, with a characteristic method: the Court sets the legal criteria and returns to the national judge the assessment of the facts and justifications. For sports-law operators - agents, clubs, federations and firms -, the ruling is a mandatory reference on the European limits of federative self-regulation: FIFA's dominant position in the market for agents' services, control of licence clauses and GDPR limits on the publicity of disciplinary sanctions.

A reading for agents and their advisers

For players' and coaches' agents operating in the European market, the judgment has an immediate operational reading: the federative rules affecting them are not untouchable, but their invalidation requires a case-by-case analysis before national courts with the criteria now set. The GDPR declaration, by contrast, is direct: the indiscriminate publication of disciplinary sanctions by the federation falls outside European legality, a conclusion with immediate practical effects on public sanction registers.

Frequently asked questions

What did the CJEU resolve in case C-209/23?

It analysed FIFA's rules on agents in light of the prohibitions of collusive practices and of abuse of dominant position, the freedom to provide services and the GDPR, setting criteria for the German judge.

What does it say about FIFA's position?

That FIFA may be considered to hold a dominant position in the market for agents' services for the transfer of players.

And about the publication of sanctions?

That the GDPR precludes FIFA's disclosure and publication of every sanction imposed on agents or clients and of the detailed information on those transactions.

Related reading

• The CJEU and legal assistance in interrogations (C-660/24 and C-681/24)
• The CJEU and the publicity of shareholder data (C-798/24)

Sources

• Court of Justice of the EU, press release on the judgment in case C-209/23 (RRC Sports): https://curia.europa.eu/site/upload/docs/application/pdf/2026-07/cp260110es.pdf