110sport: World Snooker Rule Was 'Restraint of Trade'

In a High Court ruling, in a case brought by Stephen Hendry, Mark Williams and TSN (now 110sport) against professional snooker's governing body, the World Professional Billiards and Snooker Association, Mr Justice Lloyd today ruled that the WPBSA had adopted an unlawful restraint of trade, abused their dominant position and acted against the EC Treaty in connection with rules adopted by the WPBSA board in March 2001.

The arguments were that the WPBSA's rules were:

void and unenforceable under Section 2 of the Competition Act 1998 and Article 82 of the EU treaty. These mirror each other and prohibit agreements or rules, the effect of which is to distort competition in the
market.

an abuse of its dominant position in the market contrary to section 18 of the Competition Act 1998 and/or Article 82 of the EC Treaty.

Abuse of a dominant position occurs if a party imposes unfair trading conditions or places competitors at a competitive disadvantage.

an unreasonable restraint of trade at common law.

a breach of Article 49 of the EC Treaty, which prohibits
restrictions in one member state as being effective in another member state.

Mr Justice Lloyd ruled:

that rule A5 adopted by the board was void under Section 2 and Article 81 of the EC Treaty.

that rule A5 constituted abusive conduct contrary to Section 18 of the Competition Act and/or Article 82 of the Treaty.

that the rule A5 as adopted by the board was an unlawful restraint of trade at common law.

that there has been a breach of Article 49.

but that the WPBSA's rules relating to logos, promotional work and ranking were lawful.

Given that the claimants have always maintained that not only were the rules void and unenforceable but the WSA had abused its dominant position for its own commercial ends this result vindicates the stance taken by 110sport,
Hendry and Williams.

Speaking on behalf of 110sport, CEO George Smith said: 'We are delighted with this ruling. From day one, our agenda and that of the players involved in this case has been clear: that players reserve the right to choose where
and when they play. Stephen Hendry, Mark Williams and 110sport also believed that anyone should be free to organise snooker events, so long as they enhance the image and standing of the sport.

'110sport recognised that the imposition of the rule A5 by the WPBSA represented a significant restraint on the trade of professional snooker players and potential promoters of the sport, by insisting that players sign exclusively for a ruling meant that players could only play on WPBSA approved events and could not play any cue sport at any time without the prior approval of the WPBSA.

'This meant effectively that the players would have to seek permission to practice let alone play in rival events.

'Only after we challenged this ruling in court did the WPBSA decide to rescind the A5 ruling, but even then, they still kept that rule in their regulations, in effect, still possessing a means to stop players and promoters from plying their trade elsewhere.

'Why did the WPBSA introduce the ruling? Why did they take so long to withdraw the ruling? Why did they eventually withdraw the ruling? Why did they not give an undertaking to not re-introduce the ruling and avoid the expense of a court ruling on the matter?

'This entire process could have been avoided had the WPBSA fully addressed any of the above questions at any time over a six month period earlier this year.'

Speaking after the ruling, seven-times former world champion Stephen Hendry said: 'This is great news. All I wanted was to have the same opportunity and choice that is afforded to other top professional sportsmen and women around the world, namely to play where I like and when I like.'

For further information and interviews with CEO George Smith, Managing Director Gerry Sinclair or Stephen Hendry contact:

Stewart Weir
Communications Director
on 01355 599400 or 07802 819028 or s.weir@110sport.com