This post is also available in: Nederlands (Dutch)

16th of August 2021

It begins to look like the FCI and its member kennel clubs are frequent offenders in the violation of the European anti-trust legislation. The FCI with the Mexican Kennel Club, the Spanish Kennel Club and the German Kennel Club have been found guilty four times in a row of violating the European anti-trust legislation. Normally, three times is the charm, but with the FCI, the frequent violation of the anti-trust legislation is apparently necessary and thus the goal to remain in the saddle as a monopolist, so that the possible privileges, friendly services and whether or not financial gain can be maintained. One might think that this monopolistic action has been elevated to an objective, which might create an interesting situation.

The FCI is based in Belgium, a country in which the law on associations provides for the possibility of declaring associations null and void if their purpose is contrary to the law. This recidivism points to this. Also the German court in Düsseldorf has already demanded that the FCI must change its statutes on pain of heavy fines. The question could arise as to when the Belgian public prosecutor is going to take action to call the FCI, which is based in Belgium, and its administrators to account, as well as to seriously scrutinise their statutes and internal regulations for contraventions of European anti-trust legislation. The judges have already brought to light two major infringements for which the FCI has been fined:

1 – The judges of FCI member associations should also be able to judge at non FCI member associations. (Mexico and Spain)

2 – Pedigree dogs that comply with the FCI guidelines but are not registered with the FCI but with other studbooks must still be accepted by the FCI. (Germany)

Considering the fact that the FCI has now lost four cases and has broken the same law four times, one may wonder if this repeat offender should not be seriously investigated. After all, there are still many rules in the FCI statutes and regulations as well as national kennel clubs that are contrary to the Belgian c.q. European competition law. The advantage is that this case is now prosecuted so that not the breeders’ clubs, their members, have to use the money for the public lawsuit, but the State starts a public prosecution against the FCI and its board members.

The question then is whether the FCI directors’ liability insurance will cover its clients if they are proven offenders who are found guilty of breaking the same law over and over again and yet deliberately take on the next case and just lose it again, and that with the breeders’ money.

Edwin Meyer Viol

See also PDF attachment summary of the article ‘Supreme Authority of the Canine World’ by Jim Engel. With description Mexican and Spanish FCI case

By Ras en Recht the two following judgments concerning the anti-trust law are described in the article ‘Kennel clubs in violation of anti-trust law’.

The FCI as a frequent offender.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.