CYIL 2014

253 / 532

237
EUROPEAN ANTIǧDISCRIMINATION LAWAND THE LEGAL STATUS OF PROFESSIONAL ATHLETES
the general impression of the public media, the Court of Appeal focused on the
particular aspects and circumstances of the case and found that the statements were
not attributable to the employer.
In the margin we want to draw attention to a curiosity which had appeared
already before the first instance. The Consiliul National referred to the exception
which is laid down in Article 4, paragraph of the Directive 2000/78/EC. According
to this provision churches and other public or private organizations, the ethos of
which is based on religion or belief, may, under certain conditions, apply preferential
treatment to employees who share the organization’s ethos. Such differentiation will
not be qualified as discrimination within the meaning of Article 1 of the Directive
2000/78/EC.26 The Consiliul Naţional, for a moment, considered the idea that a soccer
club is a kind of entity which shares certain values, traditions and beliefs, and that
this “belief ” might come close to an organization’s ethos within the meaning of the
Directive. The Court, however, concluded that the employment of a professional
athlete cannot be made conditional upon moments related to his intimate family or
private life, but that only his objective sporting performance is relevant.27
6. Final considerations
The case of FC Steaua has raised some interesting questions concerning the issue
of discrimination based on sexual orientation in the relationship between a sports
club and a professional athlete. Given the particular circumstances of the case we
shall not generalize the findings of the ECJ. As far as the relationship between the
national and the EU level is concerned, there is a certain contradiction between the
judgment of the ECJ and the considerations of the Court of Appeals.
When interpreting anti-discrimination law the ECJ focused on the definition of
general principles and rather swept minor problems like e.g. the issue of attributability
of discriminatory statements, the liability of legal entities and the reversal of the
burden of proof under the rug of an overall context and of the general impression of
the public. Such an interpretation, on one hand, greatly expanded the applicability of
anti-discrimination law in situations when problematic statements and declarations
become public. From this point of view, various campaigns of sports organizations
and clubs against racism and so-called homophobia 28 serve not only as a moral
26 The condition is that the religion or belief of the person concerned constitutes a genuine, legitimate and
justified occupational requirement with regard to the organization’s ethos.
27 See more detailed Jura, Christian. From the National Council for Combating Discrimination to the
Court of Justice of the European Union. Case C-81/12. The paper was presented at the international
conference “Challenges of the Knowledge Society” held in May 2013 in Bucharest. For the written
version of the paper, see Proceedings of the conference ( available at:
html).
28 In 2003 and 2006 the UEFA issued two handbooks against discrimination: „UEFA-Handbuch für
gute Verhaltensregeln zur Bekämpfung des Rassismus“ a „Bekämpfung von Rassismus im Klubfussball.
Ein Handbuch für Vereine“ (available at:
index.html).