From Law wiki, the wiki for law research

Union royale belge des sociétés de football association ASBL v Jean-Marc Bosman, Royal club liégeois SA v Jean-Marc Bosman and others and Union des associations européennes de football (UEFA) v Jean-Marc Bosman.
ECJ
short name:	{{{short_name}}}
Submi Date:	6 October
Submit Year:	1993
Date decided:	15 December
Year decided:	1995
FullName:	Union royale belge des sociétés de football association ASBL v Jean-Marc Bosman, Royal club liégeois SA v Jean-Marc Bosman and others and Union des associations européennes de football (UEFA) v Jean-Marc Bosman.
CelexID:	{{{CelexID:}}}
CaseNumber:	C-415/93
Chamber:	Full chamber
Nationality:	Belgium
Procedural:	Cour d'appel de Liège, 9e chambre civile, arrêt du 01/10/1993 (29.426/92)
Judge Rapporteur:	G. Federico Mancini
JudgePresident:	Gil Carlos Rodríguez Iglesias
Advocate General:	Carl Otto Lenz
Instruments Cited:
Legislation Affecting:	Interprets Article 48, TEEC
Keywords

C-415/93. M. Bosman, a Belgian citizen, was unable to transfer from a Belgian football club to a French football club, because rules created by the Belgian football association required the payment of a transfer fee to the original club. Bosman argued that this requirement was in breach of Art. 39 of the ECTreaty, which set out to ensure Free Movement Of Workers. The significant technical questions for the European Court of Justice were (i) whether playing football constituted 'employment' in the terms of Art. 39; (ii) whether Art. 39 created obligations on a private body as well as the state.

Inasmuch as playing football was an economic activity, the ECJ held that a professional footballer was an employee of the football club, and therefore a 'worker' whose free movement should be ensured. As to the direct effect of Art. 39, the ECJ held that any organization that is capable of creating terms and rules of employment is a target of the obligations under Art. 39.

Consequently, the imposition of a transfer fee between football clubs, in so far as it discouraged free movement of players between member states, was in breach of Art. 39.

See also Agonese (2000). [[Category:UK