Agreements had been made controlling the broadcasting of football matches. The director general sought to challenge them as restrictive practices, since the individual clubs had signed away their right themselves to arrange for the broadcasting of their matches. The Premier league constitution required the clubs to surrender certain rights to it. Exclusive rights had been sold to Sky Television.
Held: It is an established principal that an obligation must involve the closing of a door that was previously open, if it is to be regarded as a restriction. The starting point was of individual clubs coming together under certain conditions, not that of an existing group accepting restrictions. The sharing of revenues promoted financial equality and improved the competitiveness of the league, and also promote competition between broadcasters. Nevertheless some restrictions were declared acceptable, as to the freedom to offer broadcasting of matches to other TV companies by individual clubs, as to a first offer of highlights to the BBC, and that of not entering into other competitions without the consent of the Premier League. The restriction against the offer of rights to offer matches to other satellite companies was unlawful.
Judges:
The Hon. Mr.Justice Ferris, Mr. B.M.Currie, Mr. D.L.Summers
Citations:
Times 18-Aug-1999, [2000] EMLR 78
Statutes:
Restrictive Trade Practices Act 1976 1(2) 19(1), Restrictive Trade Practices (Services) Order 1976 (1976 SI 1976/98)
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Re Telephone Apparatus Manufacturers’ Application CA 1963
Willmer LJ said that a particular agreement did not involve the acceptance of restrictions: ‘This, in the picturesque phrase used by [counsel for the Association], did not have the effect of closing any door that was previously open to the . .
Confirmed – Re Ravenseft Properties Ltd’s Application 1978
A restriction in terms of the 1976 Act was not accepted merely by the agreement with the landlord. The tenant, in taking the lease, did not restrict a pre-existing freedom to trade on the demised premises, but rather obtained a new, but limited, . .
Cited by:
Cited – Attheraces Ltd and Another v British Horse Racing Board and Another ChD 21-Dec-2005
The claimants relayed horse racing events to bookmakers. The respondents collected data about the races and horses. The claimants sought the freedom to use that data, and the defendants asserted a database right to control such use.
Held: BHB . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Commercial, Media
Updated: 01 December 2022; Ref: scu.135823