EU ANTITRUST LAW AND THE LIMITS OF SELF- REGULATION IN SPORT: IMPLICATIONS FOR NIGERIA

Abstract

The aim of this paper was to examine the limits of selfregulation in sport under European Union (EU) antitrust law and to consider the implications for Nigeria. It analyzes four Grand Chamber rulings, European Superleague, ISU, Royal Antwerp and Diarra, which together mark a decisive shift in the application of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU to sport. The Court held that rules on prior approval, participation and sanctions that lack transparent, objective, non-discriminatory and proportionate safeguards are restrictive by object and amount to abuse of dominance. The paper identified the four-limb checklist that now frames lawful sporting regulation: legitimate aim, objective criteria, proportionality and independent review. It assessed Nigerian competition law under the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act 2018, which mirrors the EU model but remains underdeveloped in jurisprudence and under-enforced in practice. Although the FCCPC has acted against large firms such as Meta and MultiChoice, no comparable scrutiny has been applied to sports bodies. The paper therefore argued that Nigerian federations should exercise the same gatekeeper powers condemned in Europe. It recommended embedding the four-limb checklist into Nigerian practice to curb excessive autonomy and align sport with competition law.