The Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) is now confronting two additional antitrust lawsuits initiated by former athletes. These new legal challenges arise as a separate, existing antitrust lawsuit against the promotion continues to progress through the court system.
The Lawsuit Led by Phil Davis
One of the recently filed suits, submitted to the U.S. District Court in Nevada, is spearheaded by former UFC light heavyweight Phil Davis. The legal firm Berger Montague, which was involved in a recent antitrust settlement against the UFC and continues to represent fighters in another ongoing lawsuit (originally filed by individuals like Kajan Johnson), is also leading this new action.
According to Eric Cramer, the lead attorney representing the fighters, the lawsuit contends that the UFC obstructs potential competitors from attracting enough high-level athletes to rival the promotion at the sport`s elite tier.
“We intend to prove that the UFC engaged in a predatory scheme to undermine would-be competitors to the UFC, which the suit claims had the effect of maintaining and enhancing the UFC’s dominance, and thereby impairing the careers and pay not just of the UFC’s own fighters, but also of professional MMA fighters like Mr. Davis competing for MMA promotions across the MMA industry,” Cramer stated in a press release.
This particular antitrust lawsuit does not seek monetary compensation. Instead, the fighters are requesting a court injunction to prevent the UFC from continuing its alleged illegal conduct. They hope a successful outcome will “create the conditions for free and fair competition among professional MMA promotions,” which in turn would benefit the careers and pay of professional fighters throughout the sport.
Phil Davis commented on the filing, stating he was “proud to stand up for professional MMA fighters to unlock the UFC’s stranglehold on the entire sport.”
The relief sought in the Davis-led lawsuit specifically includes various changes to the UFC`s business operations. These include eliminating restrictive or exclusionary clauses from fighter agreements, removing arbitration clauses and class action waivers from contracts, and adding a “sunset provision” to existing and future contracts. This provision would grant fighters the right to terminate their contract without penalty within one year of signing.
The Lawsuit Led by Misha Cirkunov
A second lawsuit was filed against the UFC on May 23, headed by veteran fighter Misha Cirkunov. This action specifically focuses on fighters who entered into contracts with the UFC that contained clauses related to arbitration or waiving the right to participate in class actions.
Previously, there were two main antitrust lawsuits against the UFC. One, led by fighters like Cung Le, covered the period from 2010 to 2017 and was eventually settled for $375 million. The second case, initiated by fighters including Kajan Johnson, covers athletes from 2017 onwards and is still making its way through the court system.
However, in the ongoing Johnson lawsuit, the UFC recently filed a motion seeking to deny or strike the class action status, arguing that some potential class members had signed contracts with Zuffa (the UFC`s parent company) that included arbitration or class-action waiver clauses.
The new lawsuit led by Misha Cirkunov and others aims to address this specific issue. It represents fighters who signed contracts containing these arbitration or class action waiver clauses, seeking to resolve this point separately and potentially prevent further delays in the original lawsuit filed by Johnson and other UFC competitors.
According to the lawsuit text, despite disagreeing with the UFC`s stance, Cirkunov has filed this case on behalf of fighters (including himself) who competed from July 1, 2017, onwards and signed contracts with Zuffa containing arbitration clauses or class action waivers. This action is taken to avoid delaying the Johnson case and to ensure the validity of these specific clauses can be legally determined.
The Cirkunov lawsuit not only seeks damages but also requests a court order to invalidate the arbitration and class action waiver clauses in existing UFC contracts and to prohibit their inclusion in future agreements.
Upcoming Hearing
Judge Richard Boulware, who has overseen the prior antitrust cases, has scheduled a hearing for June 3. This hearing will address several motions related to the Johnson antitrust lawsuit, including the motion to deny class certification, which the new Cirkunov lawsuit directly tackles.
