Liverpool Fans vs UEFA: A Legal Battle for Justice

Sean Abram and 886 others vs UEFA – High Court – [2024] EWHC 1518 (KB) – Case Summary

The High Court has addressed a significant legal dispute involving 887 Liverpool fans and the Union des Associations Européennes de Football (UEFA). The case arose from the chaotic scenes at the 2022 Champions League final in Paris, where Liverpool fans faced severe congestion and were subjected to tear gas and pepper spray by French police.

On 28 May 2022, Liverpool played Real Madrid at the Stade de France. The match is remembered less for the result than for the chaotic scenes as Liverpool fans with valid tickets struggled to get into the ground through dangerously congested routes. The situation culminated in the French police deploying tear gas and pepper spray against them.

This claim was brought by 887 Liverpool fans against UEFA, the organizers of the Champions League tournament. The fans claimed that they suffered physical and psychological injury and loss due to UEFA's alleged breaches of duty. Some claimants were particularly vulnerable to injury either because they were children or survivors of the tragic events at Hillsborough in 1989.

Investigations by the French government, the French senate, and UEFA followed the events at the Stade de France. In March 2023, UEFA announced a refund scheme, paying out over €4 million to Liverpool fans. Despite this, the fans alleged that UEFA was in breach of duty, with their allegations grouped into eight broad categories, including improper planning, lack of training for stewards, and failure to manage congestion.

UEFA disputed the court's jurisdiction, arguing that the claims would require the English court to make findings under French law regarding the actions of the French state. UEFA's jurisdiction application was listed for hearing on 27-28 June 2024.

On 21 May 2024, UEFA sought directions for a meeting of the parties' respective French law experts, the preparation of a joint statement, and the service of supplemental reports addressing any areas of disagreement between the experts. The Honourable Mr. Justice Pepperall dismissed the application on 6 June 2024, and the case remained listed for hearing on 27-28 June.

Tickets issued by UEFA provided that the terms and conditions were governed by French law. The fans accepted that their claims in contract and tort were governed by French law. UEFA's terms also provided that if the ticketholder qualified as a consumer, the courts of their place of residence or domicile would have exclusive jurisdiction. The fans thus asserted that the English court had jurisdiction.

UEFA sought to rely on an expert report on French law by Dr. Alexandre Malan. The fans sought permission to rely on their own expert report by Professor Philippe Stoffel-Munck. The court granted permission, rejecting UEFA's argument to limit the scope of the professor's report.

In correspondence, UEFA also sought directions for a meeting of the experts and the preparation of a joint report to narrow issues. The court refused to give such directions, stating that the jurisdiction challenge was not the appropriate forum for resolving disputes relating to the substantive claim.

During the hearing, UEFA argued for an adjournment of the jurisdiction hearing until the Michaelmas term, citing insufficient time for effective directions regarding expert evidence. The fans agreed that it was impractical to case manage the expert evidence just three weeks before the hearing. The court concluded that the real question was whether the hearing should proceed as listed or be adjourned until October.

The court ultimately decided not to adjourn the jurisdiction challenge, emphasizing the importance of resolving the matter promptly and avoiding further costs. The jurisdiction challenge was set to proceed on the revised dates of 29-30 July 2024.