Doping, European Law and the Implications of Meca-Medina

The ruling of the European Court of Justice in the anti-doping case of Meca Medina v. The Commission has important implications for athletes, domestic governing bodies, international federations and supra-national actors such as WADA and the Court of Arbitration for Sport. Meca-Medina has been criticised as an unwelcome interference by the courts in the legitimate activities of sporting organisations, but after Bosman it was fanciful to argue that those organisations should be ‘above the law’ and the courts should have no jurisdiction over their activities. That said, there is a stark difference between the courts having jurisdiction over sports’ decisions and being willing to overturn them - the courts have been, and remain, willing to defer to the expertise of sporting organisations. However, the ECJ’s ruling in MOTOE confirms that the courts will intervene in appropriate circumstances. In order to avoid sanction on competition law grounds sports organisations must thus be able to justify their provisions on (for example) what is an unacceptable level of nandrolone, show that athletes’ fundamental rights such as the right to a fair hearing have been respected, and ensure that any sanctions imposed upon athletes who fall foul of doping regulations are proportionate to the offence committed

The state of EU sports law: lessons from UEFA’s ‘Financial Fair Play’ regulations

The EU’s sporting competence derives from the legal norm, established by the European Court of Justice, that requires that ‘sporting rules’ of sports governing bodies which have an economic impact and which breach the fundamental freedoms or competition law can only be justified if shown to be a proportionate response to an inherent need in the sport. However, the certainty of this norm is undermined by the EU’s subsequent Treaty competence for sport, a political compromise, which is ambiguous, and which in due course generated the European Commission’s sports policy, with its emphasis on governance and social dialogue. Consequently, EU sports law has evolved into ‘soft law’ which is far from coherent. This is demonstrated in the tolerance shown for certain of UEFA’s ‘sporting rules’, notably its Financial Fair Play Regulations, which restrict competition and lack proportionality yet have not attracted sanction from the European Commission (a sports law policy which could be characterised as not even constituting soft law but delegalisation)

Services of general economic interest

This chapter explores the modernisation and Europeanisation of SGEI in the light of austerity measures. The regulation of State aid has played an important role in curbing public expenditure in the EU but the processes involved are inherently undemocratic. It is argued that the new language of public spending is designed to create efficient and effective social policies that are adequate and fiscally sustainable, with social innovation seen as a form of social investment to be tested through evidence-based decision-making

Conclusions: Constructing a ‘Solid’ Multi-Layered Health Care Edifice

Item does not contain fulltex