Inhaltsübersicht – Zeitschrift für Sport und Recht – Heft 3/2025

Das Heft 3/2025 der SpuRt wird postalisch in der 20. KW zugestellt und ist seit dem 09.05.2025 im Modul Sportrecht plus auf Beck-Online abrufbar.

Editorial

  • Gipfelstürmerinnen (A.Rombach, S. 213)

Aufsätze 

  • Neuere Rechtsfragen zu den Sportkorruptionsdelikten (§§ 265c-265e StGB)  (R. Krack, S. 214)

The article examines recent legal questions related to sports corruption offenses under Sections 265c-265e of the German Criminal Code, introduced in April 2017. It addresses longstanding and emerging interpretation issues concerning the applicability of these provisions, particularly focusing on sports betting fraud (§ 265c) and manipulation of professional sports competitions (§ 265d). A key criticism of the legislation is its dual aim of protecting both the integrity of sports and financial interests. The article discusses whether performance bonuses can be considered corruptive agreements, the applicability of these laws to football, and whether e-sports and amateur sports fall under §§ 265c-265d. It highlights the complex role of individuals like trainers and explores the impact of variables such as financial gain, participation criteria, and the scale of advantage required for enhanced penalties under § 265e. While analyzing these legal intricacies, the article notes discrepancies in language and interpretation that might limit the applicability of § 265c. It concludes that multiple unresolved interpretation issues persist, indicating that the discussion surrounding sports corruption offenses is ongoing.

  • Die Zukunft der Sportschiedsgerichtsbarkeit nach ISU und RFC Seraing (U.Haas, H. Kahlert, S.221)

The article examines the implications of the ECJ’s judgment in the ISU case and the Advocate General’s opinion in the RFC Seraing matter on the future of sports arbitration. It explains that the ISU judgment did not in fact find CAS arbitration agreements to be in violation of EU law. In any case, such view would violate both the New York Convention and, in antidoping cases, the International Convention against Doping in Sport, and finds not support in EU law. In respect of the Advocate General’s opinion in RFC Seraing, the authors respectfully opine that the Advocate General misconceived the characteristics of sports arbitration and suggested an approach that would be in violation of the New York Convention. Contrary to her view, review of CAS awards (and other sports arbitration decisions) should be limited to those elements of EU law that form part of the public policy. If the ECJ were to follow the General Advocate’s view, or even find CAS arbitration agreements to be in violation of EU law, this would result not only in a breach of public international law but also undermine significantly the uniform application of sporting regulations world-wide, which is unanimously viewed as a prerequisite for safeguarding fairness in sports.

  • Wer trägt die Kosten für ein sicheres Stadionerlebnis? Zur Polizeikostenentscheidung des BVerfG und ihren Folgen für den deutschen Profifußball (T. Obermann, L. Steinbeck, S. 229)

The article discusses the implications of the German Federal Constitutional Court’s (BVerfG) ruling that allows police cost fees to be imposed on organizers of high-risk football matches in the Bundesliga. It explores how the ruling resolves a long-standing dispute between Bremen and the German Football League (DFL) regarding fee legality under Bremen’s fee regulations. The court acknowledges the legitimacy of shifting police costs from taxpayers to event organizers, viewing the fees as a matter affecting the organizers‘ fundamental rights, specifically their professional freedom. The article critiques the BVerfG’s reasoning on causation and benefit relationships between police costs and event organizing, suggesting gaps in the court’s rationale. Despite concerns, the article notes that the verdict incorporates protection mechanisms for financially vulnerable clubs, potentially sparing third and regional league teams from crippling fees. It also addresses the decision’s broader impact on understanding football’s socio-cultural relevance within legal contexts. The article outlines two scenarios for future cost handling: a potential economic disadvantage for clubs based on geographic fee impositions and a proposed internal fund where costs are collectively managed within the league. It considers the possibility of a special levy across all clubs, presenting this as a way to fairly distribute financial responsibility. The article emphasizes the importance of finding equitable solutions to balance police cost burdens and maintain competitive integrity.

The article explores the use of cooperatives as an alternative financing model in modern professional football, highlighting their adoption by clubs like FC St. Pauli and FC Schalke 04. These clubs aim to preserve their traditional club structures and avoid large investors by forming cooperatives – entities where fans can buy membership shares, which do not grant voting rights within the club. The FC St. Pauli initiative, for instance, intends to raise funds to settle debts and maintain stadium operations through the cooperative. Cooperatives, governed by German cooperative law, provide a democratic structure with one vote per member, irrespective of investment size, contrasting sharply with capitalistic models like capital corporations that allow greater control to larger investors. Unlike capital corporations, cooperatives offer minimal economic return, focusing instead on social and cultural benefits for members, making them less attractive to profit-driven investors. Additionally, cooperatives face risks from potential financial instability due to members‘ rights to withdraw their capital contributions. While cooperatives offer a unique method for fan engagement and financial enhancement, their effectiveness as a sustainable alternative to large investors remains uncertain. The article suggests that although they may not replace traditional investment structures, cooperatives could be used in conjunction with existing models within the football industry, particularly to engage fans in a financial partnership with their beloved clubs.

  • Die neue FlexCo: Eine Alternative für Spielbetriebsgesellschaften im österreichischen Profifußball? (C. Pacher, S. 241)

The article discusses the potential of the newly introduced Flexible Kapitalgesellschaft (FlexCo) as a viable alternative for professional football clubs in Austria. With the introduction of the Flexible-Kapitalgesellschafts-Gesetz (FlexKapGG) effective January 1, 2024, Austrian clubs now have the option to operate their entities not only as GmbHs or AGs but also as FlexCos. Despite the clear compatibility with Austrian Football Bundesliga’s (ÖFBL) requirements, clubs have hesitated to adopt this corporate form. The article delves into the pros and cons of FlexCo, suggesting the benefits might outweigh the hesitations seen in its practical adoption. Key advantages of FlexCo include flexible voting rights, the introduction of Unternehmenswertanteile (UWAs) which allow foreign private investors to hold non-voting shares up to 24.99% of share capital, and simplified share transfer processes compared to GmbHs. However, the new structure entails potential administrative burdens and uncertainties, especially concerning UWA management and legal interpretations. The ÖFBL’s current rules don’t preclude FlexCo, but modifications might be necessary to address peculiarities of FlexCo, especially to maintain regulatory oversight like the 50+1 rule. The article posits that FlexCo could offer more attractive conditions for external investments, though potential adjustments in ÖFBL’s regulations are yet to be seen.

  • DFB, Adidas, Nike und das Vergaberecht: Was das EuGH-Urteil zur FIGC für deutsche Sportverbände bedeutet (C. Schoppe, F. Bonde, S. 245)

The article discusses the implications of a 2021 European Court of Justice (ECJ) judgment that classified the Italian Football Federation (FIGC) as a public contracting authority subject to European procurement law and evaluates whether similar rulings could apply to German sports associations, particularly the German Football Association (DFB). The article concludes that the DFB does not qualify as a public contracting authority because it is neither predominantly publicly funded nor subject to public oversight over its procurement decisions. However, other German sports associations that receive substantial public funding might be considered public contracting authorities and thus required to comply with procurement laws, including conducting Europe-wide tenders for contracts exceeding threshold values. The DFB’s recent and controversial sponsorship agreement with Nike is examined, taking these legal considerations into account. Although the sponsorship deal could be seen as a service provision requiring tendering if the DFB were a public contracting authority, the article explains that this is ultimately not the case. The article further clarifies that the DFB has full autonomy in its operations, and its funding comes primarily from private sources. Lastly, the article suggests that smaller German sports associations, more reliant on public funding, should regularly assess their funding structures to determine whether they need to comply with public procurement law.

  • Spielwertung bei Einsatz eines nicht im Spielbericht eingetragenen Fußballspielers (D. Dawirs, F. Kastner, M. Senghaus, S. 251)

The article examines the consequences in German football for fielding a player not listed on the match report, focusing on the rules of the German Football Association (DFB) and its regional bodies. While written player registration in match reports is critical for fair play, the lack of uniform regulations results in varying outcomes across different associations, ranging from mandatory match forfeits to case-by-case assessments or even no penalties. The article highlights this inconsistency, urging harmonized rules to ensure fairness and prevent perceptions of inequality. Currently, some associations exclude forfeits for minor registration errors, while others mandate automatic match results changes or exercise discretion. The authors argue that rules excluding automatic forfeiture prioritize sporting outcomes and fairness, whereas rigid rules mandating forfeits for minor infringements may be disproportionate. Flexible, caseby-case decisions, with a focus on whether competition integrity was compromised, are favored. They propose a harmonized approach across associations to enhance legal certainty, especially regarding promotions and transitions between league levels, while maintaining respect for competitive results. An overall unified handling of the issue by the DFB could improve consistency and uphold the sport’s integrity.

Rechtsprechung

Kurzübersicht (S. 256)

Internationales

  • EuGH: EU-Verbraucherschutz als Grenze für Verträge zur Förderung von minderjährigen Nachwuchssportlern (S. 256)
  • UK Supreme Court: Arbeitnehmerstatus für britische Teilzeit- Fußball-Schiedsrichter (S. 263)
  • CAS: Regelsperre für Doping-Meldepflichtverstöße und Strafmilderung (S. 268)
  • CAS: Rechtmäßigkeit der FIFA-Sanktionen gegen Luis Rubiales (S. 273)

Ordentliche Gerichtsbarkeit

  • OLG Dresden: Zum ärztlichen Aufklärungs- und Behandlungsfehler bei Leistungssportlerin (Kunstturnen) (m. Anm. Castendiek) (S. 280)
  • LG Berlin II: Mitgliedschaft von AfD-Abgeordneten im FC Bundestag e.V. (m. Anm. Engelhard / Herrlein) (S. 285)
Arbeitsgerichtsbarkeit
  • ArbG Karlsruhe: Automatische Vertragsverlängerung aufgrund von Spieleinsätzen als einmalige Verlängerungsoption (S. 289)
  • ArbG Bonn: Unzuständigkeit der Arbeitsgerichtsbarkeit bei behaupteter Übergehung als DFB-Schiedsrichter (m. Anm. Kleen) (S. 291)

Sozialgerichtsbarkeit

  • LSG Baden-Württemberg: Sozialversicherungspflicht von Doping-Kontrolleuren (m. Anm. Meyer / Kühhorn) (S. 297)

Verbandsgerichtsbarkeit

  • DFB-Bundesgericht: Unzulässige Berufung von Ligakonkurrenten nach Feuerzeugwurf gegen Torwart (S. 303)
  • DFB-Bundesgericht: Spielwertung nach Schwächung der Mannschaft durch Feuerzeugwurf gegen Torwart (II) (S. 304)
  • BFV-VSG: Keine Spielwertung bei zu geringer Anzahl von deutschen U23-Spielern (m. Anm. Opfermann) (S. 308)
  • BFV-SG: Strafbarer Spielausfall in der Regionalliga mangels Ausweichspielstätte (S. 313)
  • DBU-VG: Sperre von Billardspielern wegen Teilnahme an einem nicht genehmigten Turnier (S. 315)

Schaufenster

  • Tagungsankündigung: „Dispute Resolution in Sport“ an der Universität Bayreuth (1./2. Oktober 2025) (S. 317)
  • Junges Netzwerk Sportrecht: Bericht von der Frühjahrsveranstaltung 2025 in Düsseldorf Niklas Luft (S. 318)
  • Schäfer: Competitive Balance als Rechtfertigung von Wettbewerbsbeschränkungen im Sport (Rez. J. Kornbeck) (S. 318)
  • Sander: Vertragsspieler und Mindestlohn (Rez. P. S. Fischinger) (S. 320)