Over the summer, we have been working on an article on the intersection between sport and competition law, which will be published later this year. One of the judgements that will feature is the ECJ’s preliminary ruling in RRC Sports (C-209/23), delivered on 16 July 2026, just one week after its judgement in ROGON.

Following its recent judgements in Super League, ISU, Royal Antwerp, FIFA v Diarra, CD Tondela and ROGON, the judgement is important not only for football agents and FIFA, but more broadly for any private regulator exercising normative power over economic activity. Contrary to the expectations of both supporters and opponents of FIFA’s Football Agent Regulations (FFAR), the ECJ neither condemned nor endorsed the regulations as a whole. Instead, it significantly narrowed the category of rules that can be treated as restrictions of competition "by object" and confirmed that most sports rules must be assessed on their actual economic effects and, where appropriate, their legitimate objectives.

The FFAR are challenged in several jurisdictions, among other things, because they impose requirements relating to agents’ remuneration, including fee caps, licensing obligations, restrictions on approaching players or coaches already represented by another agent, and extensive disclosure obligations towards FIFA and other market participants.

👉 Swipe through the slides on LinkedIn to see some key takeaways.

💬 𝐐𝐮𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬? Feel free to reach out to our competition team or your usual contact person at 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐬𝐭.