A potential settlement has resurfaced in the ongoing class action lawsuit against the UFC, initiated by a group of former fighters. This development follows the rejection of a previous settlement offer by the presiding judge in July 2023. The new settlement proposal, totaling $375 million, is now awaiting judicial approval.
The payout will be distributed proportionally, based on factors such as each fighter’s total earnings and the number of fights they participated in during their UFC career. According to CBS Sports, this proposed settlement pertains specifically to the Le vs. Zuffa case, which includes fighters active from 2010 to 2017. The lawsuit was separated from the Johnson vs. Zuffa case after the joint settlement for both was rejected earlier this year.
On Thursday, UFC’s parent company, TKO Group Holdings, confirmed the agreement through an SEC filing. “On Sept. 26, 2024, TKO reached an agreement with the plaintiffs to settle all claims asserted in the Le case for an aggregate amount of $375 million,” read the disclosure. Per CBS Sports, the company added that the payout would be made in installments over time and anticipated the settlement would be tax-deductible.
Read more: UFC Faces February 2025 Trial After Judge Rejects $335 Million Settlement
The UFC and the fighters were disappointed when the initial settlement was rejected, with Judge Richard Boulware previously expressing concerns that the UFC’s initial offer was insufficient. Judge Boulware also took issue with the lack of changes to the UFC’s restrictive contract terms in the related Johnson vs. Zuffa case. Now, with a revised settlement for Le vs. Zuffa under consideration, the matter is once again in the hands of the judge.
Should the court approve this updated settlement, it could mark a significant step toward resolving the legal disputes that have plagued the UFC for several years.
Source: CBS Sports
Featured News
Judge Dismisses Antitrust Lawsuit Against Ivy League Over Athletic Scholarships
Oct 11, 2024 by
CPI
FTC and DOJ Revamp Merger Guidelines to Identify Illegal Transactions More Efficiently
Oct 11, 2024 by
CPI
US Consumer Watchdog Eyes Expansion of ‘Junk Fee’ Crackdown Ahead of 2024 Election
Oct 10, 2024 by
CPI
Brazil Proposes Reform to Competition Law Targeting Big Tech
Oct 10, 2024 by
CPI
Meta Enhances User Data Control, Resolving German Antitrust Dispute
Oct 10, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Refusal to Deal
Sep 27, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust’s Refusal-to-Deal Doctrine: The Emperor Has No Clothes
Sep 27, 2024 by
Erik Hovenkamp
Why All Antitrust Claims are Refusal to Deal Claims and What that Means for Policy
Sep 27, 2024 by
Ramsi Woodcock
The Aspen Misadventure
Sep 27, 2024 by
Roger Blair & Holly P. Stidham
Refusal to Deal in Antitrust Law: Evolving Jurisprudence and Business Justifications in the Align Technology Case
Sep 27, 2024 by
Timothy Hsieh