In a decision dated 1 August 2025 in the RFC Seraing case, the Court of Justice of the European Union clarified the requirement for effective judicial review of arbitral awards under EU public policy.
The Court ruled that when an award is handed down in a dispute relating to a sporting activity that constitutes an economic activity within the territory of the Union, and no direct appeal is possible before a court of a Member State, individuals should have the possibility to obtain from a national court, including on an incidental basis, a review of the compatibility of the award with the principles and provisions of EU public policy.
In paragraph 86, the Court emphasizes that this review cannot be minimalist: it must cover not only the interpretation of EU rules, but also their legal consequences and, where appropriate, the legal classification of the facts established by the arbitrator.
While the Court does not call into question sports arbitration as such, it specifies that arbitration, which is often imposed as a condition of access to the activity, cannot function as a mechanism for circumventing the fundamental guarantees of EU law. This requirement applies even when the seat of arbitration is located outside the EU, as is the case for the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) in Switzerland.
This position diverges from the approach traditionally followed by certain courts, particularly in France, which favor limited review at the enforcement phase. This decision thus introduces a broader requirement for review of compliance with EU law, confirming the central role of EU public policy in the relationship between arbitration and European law.
