Meca-Medina and Majcen v Commission: ECFI 30 Sep 2004

ECJ Competition – Freedom to provide services – Anti-doping legislation adopted by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) – Purely sporting legislation
The claimants were athletes who complained that their bans for taking sports drugs restricted their free movement as workers.
Held: Anti-doping regulations were based solely upon sporting considerations, and, having no economic considerations, could not be challenged under European regulations designed to deal with economic activities.
H. Legal, P
[2005] CEC 176, [2004] ECR II-3291, [2004] 3 CMLR 60, T-313/02, [2004] EUECJ T-313/02, Times 25-Oct-2004
CitedUnion Royale Belge des societes de Football Association and others v Bosman and others ECJ 15-Dec-1995
A request for the Court to order a measure of inquiry under Article 60 of the Rules of Procedure, made by a party after the close of the oral procedure, can be admitted only if it relates to facts which may have a decisive influence and which the . .
CitedDeliege v Ligue Francophone De Judo et Disciplines Associees Asbl and Others ECJ 11-Apr-2000
It was not an unlawful discriminatory provision to restrict those who might take part in professional sports activities in another member state to be first authorised or selected by their own national federation where such competition was not on a . .

Cited by:
CitedAdidas-Salomon Ag v Drape and others ChD 7-Jun-2006
The claimants had sponsored tennis players to wear their logo. The respondents organised tennis tournaments whose intended rules would prevent the display of the claimant’s logos. The claimants said that the restriction interfered with their rights . .
See AlsoMeca-Medina And Majcen v Commission (Competition) ECJ 18-Jul-2006
ECJ Opinion – Appeal – Rules adopted by the International Olympic Committee concerning doping control – Incompatibility with the Community rules on competition and freedom to provide services – Complaint – . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 14 May 2021; Ref: scu.215944