by In more than one First and Second Division club, the judicialization of the agreement between LaLiga and CVC, Approved on December 21, 2022 by 39 of the 42 clubs that were then part of the two categories, it had generated a lot of uncertainty. From the surroundings of 1.9 billion euros in which the agreement was based, some 1,300 had already been paid to the association he presides Javier TebasThe last of the payments is pending, committed for next June 30 for the investment fund.
From LaLiga they always conveyed peace of mind to the clubs about the possibility of an apocalyptic scenario in which Justice will determine that the agreement that had been opened that faucet of hundreds of millions of euros was illegal. A high percentage of that money (about 1,000 million, according to ‘2Playbook’) has already been committed or spent by the clubs and a judicial setback would have posed a serious threat to the competition’s economy.
Faith clubs in Thebes
The clubs trusted in that message of calm (like it more or like it less, most of them have blind faith in Javier Tebas), but they needed a favorable ruling from the Court to reinforce that peace of mind. And that expected judicial protection has arrived this Tuesday, with the decision of the Court of First Instance number 15 of Madrid of dismiss the lawsuit filed by Real Madrid and Athletic against the agreement that allowed the creation of LaLiga Impulso.
the court decision is appealed before the Provincial Court of Madrid and, ultimately, before the Supreme Court. It is foreseeable that both Athletic and especially Real Madrid will push this route, but the forcefulness with which the arguments are presented in the ruling announced this Tuesday reinforces the peace of mind that the publication of the ruling brings to the affected clubs.
“It is the confirmation that things are well done. It was legal in the civil sphere and in the criminal sphere,” declared Javier Tebas hours after learning the content of the sentence, stating that “we do not submit to the threats and coercion of anyone, no matter how great it may be,” in reference to the President of Real Madrid, Florentino Perez.
The legal arguments
The white club and Athletic, hand in hand in this matter, denounced that The LaLiga-CVC agreement contravened three legal texts: the Sports Law of 1990 (in force at that time), the Royal Decree Law 5/2015 that regulates the joint marketing of TV rights of the clubs and the statutes of LaLiga.
The judge María Vilma del Castillo. He details in his order what, in his opinion, means the non-existence of vulnerabilities related to those three legal texts to which the parties are subject. Regarding the statutory non-compliance, related to an alleged lack of information from LaLiga towards the affected clubs, the judge not only finds it proven that they were offered prior information meetings, but also highlights that as he real Madrid how Athletic attended those meetings. “It is not proven in any way that the information they required and had not been provided was relevant or conclusive to be able to decide on their voting direction regarding the contested agreements,” she summarizes.
Florentino Pérez, president of Real Madrid. / Real Madrid
Regarding Royal Decree Law 5/2015, Athletic and Real Madrid reported an alleged “expropriation or misappropriation of ownership of audiovisual rights”, arguments that the judge rejects because incorporation into the agreement is voluntary on the part of the clubs, which do not see their income damaged due to the participation of other clubs in the contract. Likewise, she highlights that the expenses and costs derived from the operation are only passed on to the clubs involved in it, which is why she rejects the plaintiffs’ arguments.
Possible resources
Finally, Madrid and Athletic understood that the creation of a commercial subsidiary (known as LaLiga Impulso) in which CVC participates for the management of the common business violated both the Sports Law and the company’s statutes. The judge highlights at this point that “CVC does not hold any position in the governing and administrative bodies of The league nor is it a member of the association”, that “the public functions that LaLiga exercises by delegation and are subject to the control of the CSD must be differentiated from the private functions” and that “the prohibition of profit motive with the prohibition of carrying out economic activities and obtain benefits from them and this is derived from RDL 5/2015”.
Again, The judge does not give even the slightest concession to the arguments presented by the plaintiffs in the scarce 12 pages of his sentence. The withdrawal of the lawsuit is forceful on the part of María Vilma del Castillo, without prejudice, of course, that higher authorities may rule in the opposite direction, a possibility that always exists. But it is undeniable that today the Spanish clubs, except for two, live much calmer than yesterday.
