Effective Judicial Protection Under EU Law and Sporting Autonomy: A Commentary on AG Spielmann’s Opinion in Joint Cases C-424/24 and C-425/24 FIGC & CONI

This article provides a critical commentary on Advocate General Spielmann’s Opinion in joint cases C-424/24 and C-425/24 (FIGC & CONI), focusing on the relationship between sporting autonomy and the principle of effective judicial protection under EU law. In particular, it examines the compatibility of the Italian system of sports justice with Articles 19(1) TEU and 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, insofar as it excludes the power of ordinary courts to annul disciplinary sanctions imposed by sports bodies, limiting judicial review to claims for damages. The analysis situates the Opinion within the evolving case-law of the Court of Justice, highlighting the shift from a predominantly competition- and free-movement-oriented approach to a more “quasi-constitutional” scrutiny centred on fundamental rights, judicial independence, and access to an effective remedy. The article also critically assesses the Advocate General’s reasoning on competition law and free movement, identifying unresolved tensions and open questions that may prove decisive in the forthcoming judgment. More broadly, it argues that the Opinion confirms a progressive recalibration of sporting autonomy in light of EU constitutional standards.