Another classic of EU sports jurisprudence: Legal implications of olympique lyonnais sasp v olivier bernard and newcastle UFC (C-325/08)

The core of this article rests with the argument that the Court in Bernard has followed the suggestions of the Advocate General regarding accepted models of training compensation. Furthermore, it is recognised that whereas Bernard does not depart from the well-established analytical framework applied in free movement cases, it does depart from Bosman on the point of the Court's appraisal of the suitability of training compensation within the confines of that framework. This gives some weight to the otherwise symbolic and unnecessary reference to art. 165(1) TFEU at [40] of the judgment. The Court's justification of the restrictions on free movement for out-of-training-contract players is contrary to the conclusions reached in the Bosman judgment, in which the same restrictions for out-of-professional-contract players were deemed illegal, can be taken as both an exception to the prohibition on age discrimination in EU law and the prima facie validation of current FIFA Regulations. © 2010 Thomson Reuters (Legal) Limited and Contributors