This ruling shows what competition law for federations means in practice when a sports federation runs a tender.
Long-term legal conflict
The dispute revolves around the procurement of carom billiards equipment, such as billiard balls and tables. The KBBB traditionally chooses regular suppliers such as NV Saluc and BV Verhoeven Biljartfabriek. However, competitor GDM Sports disputes these choices and states that they exclude competition. The Leuven corporate court previously ruled in favour of GDM Sports.
In 2022, the association organised a new tender, but the court labeled it a “sham”. It turned out that the KBBB had already concluded a contract with NV Saluc before the official procedure. The Brussels Court of Appeal confirmed this judgment, meaning that the previously imposed penalty of €1,000 per day, with a maximum of €100,000, remains in force.
Sharp criticism of the billiards association
According to the court, the KBBB “artificially restricted competition” and drafted the procurement rules in such a way that preferred suppliers were favored. The court therefore stated that the KBBB ‘clearly’ designed the tender ‘with the aim of unfairly favoring preferred players such as Saluc and Biljartfabriek Verhoeven’. This approach has led to strong criticism of the lack of transparency and honesty within the association.
The future of competition law for federations in sport
Although the KBBB indicates that it has taken note of the judgment and has organised a new tender, GDM Sports continues to contest this as well. This case highlights the importance of fair competition in the sports sector. Not only organising a tender is important; due care and compliance with competition rules are also crucial.
When does competition law apply to a federation?
A sports federation does not sit outside economic law. As soon as it sells goods or services, awards a contract, grants an exclusive right or sets the conditions under which others may trade, it acts as an undertaking or as an association of undertakings. Belgian competition law then applies to it in the same way as it applies to any company. The prohibition on agreements that restrict competition and the prohibition on abuse of a dominant position both bind a federation.
Federations are exposed for a structural reason. Within its own discipline a federation is usually the only organiser of competition, the only body that issues licences and the only route to affiliation. That position sits close to a monopoly. It is not unlawful in itself, but it raises the standard the federation has to meet. A body that others cannot avoid must be able to explain its choices.
The test for a sporting rule
Not every rule that limits someone’s freedom breaks competition law. European case law accepts that a rule with a genuine sporting purpose can stand, provided it pursues a legitimate objective, that the restriction is inherent in the organisation of the sport, and that it goes no further than the objective requires. A rule that fails one of those three points is vulnerable, and the burden of explaining it falls on the federation.
What a federation should organise
Write the criteria before the procedure starts, publish them, and apply them to every candidate in the same way. Keep the decision-making on file, including the reason why a candidate was not chosen. Separate the people who set the rules from the people who benefit from them. Where a supply contract is at stake, test the market at reasonable intervals instead of renewing an existing arrangement out of habit. A federation that can produce that record stands in a very different position when a competitor complains.
Would you like to read more about this case? Below are additional articles that further explain this case:
- Court of Appeal: billiards association guilty of ‘bad faith’
- Royal Belgian Billiards Federation made a mistake with exclusivity contracts
- Conflict in billiards sector leads to groundbreaking verdict
Further questions? Do not hesitate to contact us on 09/334.94.70, via contact form or via sport@everest-law.be.