Legal Dispute Between Football Club and Secondary Market Platform: Background and Implications
In July 2024, a case of fundamental importance for the sale of tickets in professional football was heard at the Munich District Court I (Case No.: 37 O 2100/22). The central issue was the extent to which a professional football club can successfully oppose the resale of its tickets via so-called secondary market platforms. The case highlights the interplay between ticket sales terms, consumer protection interests, and the protection of legitimate club interests in the professional and event sectors.
Initial Situation and Contractual Arrangement
Many football organizations restrict the resale of tickets for home games in their General Terms and Conditions (GTC). The aim of such regulations is to ensure controlled resale—typically via club-owned platforms—and to counteract a ticket “black market.” The defendant platform in the Munich case offered tickets that it purchased from various sources, including club members or season ticket holders, and resold them to third parties.
Legal Assessment of Ticket Resale
Validity of the GTC for Third-Party Purchasers
The District Court examined whether the club’s GTC can also be effectively applied to third parties who are not direct contractual partners of the club but become contractual partners of the platform. According to the court, this is at least the case when the respective purchasers are integrated into the original contractual relationships and their ancillary provisions—especially the sales and resale clauses—by purchasing the tickets. Decisive remains the extent to which the secondary market platform itself is aware of the club’s restrictions and systematically circumvents them.
Permissibility of Resale Restrictions
The court confirmed that clubs fundamentally have a legitimate interest in controlling the distribution of their tickets. This can result in an effective restriction on resale. However, such clauses must not generally prohibit all resale but, according to established case law, must allow reasonable, fact-based exceptions (e.g., in case of the original purchaser’s inability to attend). Furthermore, a balancing with consumer protection concerns takes place.
Unfair Competition and Claim for Injunction
The Munich District Court I saw the systematic circumvention of ticket-related resale bans by the platform as a violation of Section 4 No. 4 of the German Act Against Unfair Competition (UWG) (competitor protection) and an interference with the established and exercised business operations of the club. In particular, the deliberate promotion of contractual breaches within a commercial business model leads to an injunction claim by the football organization.
Impact on the Overall Ticket Distribution
Significance for Organizers and Platform Operators
The ruling underscores the importance of precise contract policies and clear, transparent regulations understandable to all parties for the distribution and resale of tickets. One-sided business models that rely on circumventing legitimate resale restrictions stand on uncertain legal grounds and can lead to significant risks of injunctions and damages claims. The decision is likely transferable to numerous comparable situations in the event and sports sectors.
Consumer Protection and Legitimate Interest Balancing
The interests of ticket buyers also play a significant role in this tension. Courts require organizers, when drafting their GTC, to maintain a balanced approach between protecting their own distribution system and flexibility for private users. Measures against commercial, abusive ticket trading remain permissible as long as individual and non-commercial circumstances (such as illness or prevention) are not unreasonably restricted.
Outlook and Recommendations in Case of Legal Uncertainties
It must be noted that the Munich District Court I’s ruling is not yet legally binding and—depending on further appeals, for example at the Munich Higher Regional Court—fundamental questions regarding the effectiveness of resale restrictions may remain open. However, the decision clearly signals growing judicial awareness of the (dis)respect for ticket distribution rules in the professional event environment.
For companies in the event industry, operators of (secondary market) platforms as well as holders and users of tickets, this entails an increased importance of careful review of GTC, distribution clauses, and business models.
If legal questions arise in connection with the design, enforcement, or review of distribution conditions in the ticketing area, the attorneys at MTR Legal—with their strong focus on commercial, corporate, competition, and distribution law—are available for advisory support.
