Contact | Search |

Tag: Sport

Renewed partnership with SXSW London

Posted on by Anna Weeden

For the second year running, we have partnered with South by Southwest (SXSW) as the official legal services supplier for SXSW London, taking place from 1-6 June 2026.

SXSW is a globally acclaimed event that has been at the forefront of celebrating innovation and creativity since its inception in Texas in 1987. Known for its ground-breaking conferences and festivals, SXSW brings together leading voices across technology, film, music, education and culture.

This renewed partnership reflects the strong alignment between SXSW’s visionary approach and our expertise in the creative industries. We are excited to continue to support and contribute to this vibrant gathering of leaders and creators as it enters its second year in London.

For more details about the conference, please visit the official SXSW London website.

F1 season cut short: What happens next?

Posted on by Anna Weeden

On Saturday Formula 1 (F1) announced the decision to cancel the Bahrain and Saudi Arabia Grands Prix due to the conflict in the Middle East.

While the human cost of the conflict is immeasurable and far outweighs any sporting consideration, the cancellation of multiple races will nonetheless have significant consequences for F1.

The sport is reported to face losses in excess of £100m as a result of the cancelled races – a figure that is likely to be substantially higher once sponsor compensation and other stakeholder claims are factored in, given the loss of value arising from a shortened season.

Depending on how the war unfolds, cancellations to further races could follow – in particular rounds 23 and 24, in Qatar and Abu Dhabi, could be at risk.

Mass race cancellations are not unprecedented, with the Covid pandemic resulting in races being cancelled or held behind closed doors. The prospect of a reduced racing calendar has therefore been front of mind for stakeholders negotiating contracts with rightsholders including F1 and the teams in recent years.

This has led to sophisticated stakeholders – in particular drivers, sponsors and broadcasters – digging into the force majeure provisions in their contracts with rightsholders, which can relieve a party of its obligations if they are unable to perform due to circumstances outside of its control. Sponsors and broadcasters will often try to negotiate these clauses to ensure they are entitled to a pro-rata refund of the fee for the affected Season if races are cancelled, while drivers will be keen to ensure their fee is unaffected by circumstances outside of their control.

Rightsholders will be reluctant to make these changes, given the loss of income, and there will be many cases where unequal bargaining power, or a willingness to get the deal done will leave parties who signed up to rightsholders’ standard terms without legal recourse.

While many cases will be resolved on a commercial level, with substitute rights granted at other races to maintain partnerships and key relationships in a sport that is notoriously a “small world”, the soaring commercial success of F1 and the ever increasing values of commercial deals means it would be unsurprising if the 2026 Season is marred by high-profile litigation.

Brands negotiating new sponsorship agreements with sports rights holders (including F1 teams), or renewing existing arrangements for the 2027 Season onwards, will now be minded to dig into force majeure provisions to ensure there is a satisfactory mechanism – which may include substitute rights or expert determination of the value of the lost rights – to ensure their interests are protected if races are cancelled.

McLaren v Palou: key takeaways

Posted on by Anna Weeden

In a well-documented High Court case, McLaren has been awarded millions of dollars in damages after driver Alex Palou reneged on an agreement to drive for the Arrow McLaren IndyCar Team, and to provide reserve and test driving services to the McLaren Formula 1 team.

This case provides interesting lessons for teams, athletes, agents and brands relating to agreements between teams and their elite athletes, and commercial agreements with brands and suppliers.

In particular, this case shines a light on the following issues.

Agreements with athletes

SIGNING ON FEES

Any element of an athlete’s fee that is payable in consideration of their signature is likely to be unrecoverable by their team, as was the case in McLaren v Palou, in which the Court ruled that the signing on fee was a literal reward for Palou’s agreement to sign the contract. From the team’s perspective, it would typically be considered reasonable to ensure all fees are expressed as subject to performance by the athlete, payable in instalments, and refundable if the Driver defaults.

TERMINATION RIGHTS

If an athlete is entering into a contract in order to achieve a specific outcome, whether that be securing a Formula 1 seat or a regular starting position in a football’s team’s lineup, they should be advised not to rely on promises and non-contractual representations, but instead to consider ways to hold the team accountable contractually. For example, termination rights linked to the team’s failure to support an aspiring Formula 1 driver in his journey by offering him a certain number of rookie test sessions, or including a footballer in a certain number of starting lineups during each season, can help the athlete to exit a relationship that is not working, and avoid protracted, expensive legal proceedings such as McLaren v Palou. That being said, this case has demonstrated that contracts can, and regularly are, broken in sport. If a relationship is not founded on mutual trust, making the wrong long-term commitments can be career defining.

LIABILITY AND INDEMNIFICATION

In McLaren v Palou, McLaren claimed it had suffered substantial losses relating to its Formula 1 and IndyCar teams and their commercial agreements with third parties. These alleged damages far surpassed the fees payable to Palou under the driver agreement. Careful drafting can help athletes to avoid liability for losses that do not directly result from the athlete’s breach. As a minimum, if the team’s bargaining power is such that the athlete is on the hook for losses associated with the team’s agreements with third parties, the athlete should resist providing indemnities in this regard and should require the team to agree to an express obligation to take steps to mitigate its losses. In circumstances where an athlete is being courted by another team, the athlete should take a leaf out of Palou’s book, requesting an indemnity to shield the athlete from incurring these sorts of losses.

Commercial agreements with brands or key suppliers

KEY INDIVIDUALS

In cases where major commercial agreements are contingent upon the presence of key individuals in the team, suppliers, brands and teams should weigh up the benefits of making this contractual. From the supplier or brand’s perspective, this would provide them with clear recourse – and ideally the ability to exit – should the key individual leave the team.

From the team’s perspective, in the event of the athlete’s breach of contract leading to the sponsor or supplier terminating the agreement, the team will have a more straightforward claim against the athlete given the causal relationship between athlete’s breach and team’s loss. Better still, if the team is concerned about the athlete honouring the contract, an indemnity could be sought to cover anticipated losses. That being said, the benefits of naming key individuals in commercial agreements should be assessed on a case-by-case basis taking specialist legal advice, particularly as the risk of losing the athlete in a non-breach scenario could leave the team exposed.

PERFORMANCE BONUSES

A brand will often try to include a performance-related element in sponsorship deals. This might be tied to the fee or a break clause where a certain level of performance is not achieved. While the team may be confident of achieving the performance milestones, circumstances outside of the team’s control such as a key team member’s departure (or failure to join the team as expected) could compromise the team, leading to lower than expected revenues or the departure of key partners. In McLaren v Palou, the Court determined that McLaren could not recover all of its losses linked to failure to achieve performance bonus milestones, citing the inherent uncertainty in projecting performance outcomes notwithstanding the Driver’s talent. That said, it may be preferable for a team to agree to a lower overall guaranteed fee, over a higher fee that encompasses performance-related elements.

Our sports team has extensive experience advising teams, athletes, agents and brands on agreements with elite athletes, as well as commercial deals with brands and suppliers. For more information, please get in touch.

Government consultation: the reshaping of sports sponsorships?

Posted on by Deborah King

The Department for Culture, Media and Sport have this week announced a plan to consult on a ban of unlicensed gambling operators sponsoring British sports teams. This will form part of the government’s consultation on sports sponsorship, to be launched in the spring.

This could bring about an intriguing change in sports sponsorship, particularly in respect of the sponsorship of Premier League football clubs, several of whom have unlicensed gambling operator brands on their front of shirts. While the Premier League members have voluntarily committed to removing all gambling branding from the front of shirts by the end of this current season, there was an assumption that those brands would move to shirt sleeves and other club inventory.

With a political wind behind the announced consultation to tackle the illegal gambling market, it seems more of a case of ‘when’ a ban on unlicensed gambling operators will come into force, rather than ‘if’.

This may create greater opportunities for other brands and sectors to increase their presence in football, both on front of shirts and across wider club inventory freed up by a departure of unlicensed gambling operators.

It could see a return of more alcohol brands (possibly promoting low or non-alcoholic products) to the Premier League – Guinness returned to the front of a football shirt for the first time since 1986 as part of its sponsorship of WSL2 club Bristol City Women using its Guinness 0.0 brand.

A local focus could also become more prevalent drawing on the historical and geographical connections between club and local sponsors – P&O Cruises landed on the front of shirt for Southampton last year in the Premier League.

Alternatively, there may be an opportunity for both established and challenger brands who have not previously partnered with football clubs to enter the market. This may be at a reduced price compared to current levels given the potential amount of inventory that could be available.

In any case, front of football shirts might look a little different in the not too distant future.

Divorce and financial claims: What foreign Premier League players need to know

Posted on by Dea Dragashi

The Premier League attracts the best footballing talent from across the world, but the family law pitfalls to which footballers are exposed by virtue of living and working in this jurisdiction are often overlooked.

In an article published by LawInSport, associate Matthew Hodgson explains why understanding the legal landscape in England and Wales is essential for players and their advisers upon them making their move. The principles of family law in this jurisdiction give courts wide-ranging powers and can apply to footballers who arrive here in a relatively short amount of time. The article covers:

  • How long does a player have to be here before a claim can arise?
  • What do players and their advisors need to know?
  • The different types of claims
    • Schedule 1 claims
    • The treatment of pre-nuptial agreements
    • Part III claims
  • What can incoming players do to protect themselves?

Those with a subscription can read the full article on the LawInSport website here.

LawInSport is a sports law knowledge hub and global community that provides expert analysis and commentary on the latest legal developments in sport. It collaborates with a community of over 30,000 lawyers, sports executives, sports administrators, athletes, coaches, academics and students, and their organisations, to share knowledge and grow understanding of law in sport.

The Creator Economy in film and TV

Posted on by Anna Weeden

The shift in the TV and media landscape

The television and media landscape is undergoing a profound shift. Where traditional broadcasters and studios once exclusively dominated, now content creators, originating from platforms like YouTube, TikTok and Instagram, are emerging as some of the most powerful forces in entertainment. Their profound influence is being recognised across the UK, highlighted by the recent launch of an all-party parliamentary group (APPG) to represent UK creators and influencers. These online platforms enable creators to cultivate direct relationships with audiences and bypass traditional gatekeepers, retaining complete control over their content.

What has caused this shift and how have audiences responded?

The Covid-19 pandemic in 2020 accelerated the global digital transformation, leading to a surge in online content creation. With audiences spending more time online and in isolation, many individuals who faced job losses during the pandemic turned to content creation as a source of income. Simultaneously, established creators were forced to adapt their practices by developing a more innovative, dynamic and home-grown approach to producing content, now that access to traditional studios, large production teams, and elaborate sets was closed off to them.

However, it has now become clear that this was not merely a trend during the pandemic. Rather, this new medium has endured and significantly grown since 2020, as evidenced by a recent impact report by Oxford Economics which revealed that YouTube content creators contributed £2.2bn to the UK economy in 2024 and supported 45,000 jobs. The speed and ease of producing social media content, in contrast to traditional linear television series for example, enables influencers and content creators to publish daily content. This, in turn, helps them maintain their cultural and social relevance, audience engagement, and visibility on the constantly changing and elusive algorithm.  

The resulting content is concise, impactful, and high-quality; catering to modern preferences (particularly among Gen-Z viewers) for short, easily digestible, and more personal viewing experiences with real-time audience engagement. Digital platforms democratise content by breaking down barriers, enabling direct interaction between creators and audiences rather than the traditional one-way broadcast model, and reaching a global viewership.

Bridging the gap between content creators and traditional media

As content creators continue to build their vast platforms and fanbases, traditional broadcasters are recognising the value of collaborating with these influencers and engaging them directly to produce, host, or star in more conventional TV and media formats. Content creators bring fresh, dynamic new voices and concepts and large (typically young) viewership. Paired with the resources, studios, personnel, equipment and budgets of streamers or other platforms, the result is exciting new content that appeals to a new audience – many of whom may not typically engage with traditional media.

Examples include:

  • MrBeast: Beast Games, hosted by YouTuber MrBeast (real name Jimmy Donaldson), is a high-budget reality competition series on Amazon Prime Video. Released in 2024, the show featured over 1,000 contestants competing for a $5 million prize. Produced by Amazon MGM Studios, Insider Entertainment, and Blink49 Studios, the series amassed 50 million viewers within 25 days of its debut and has been renewed for two more seasons.
  • Amelia Dimoldenberg: Known for her YouTube series Chicken Shop Date, Amelia has transitioned into traditional media, hosting Channel 4 documentaries such as Celebrity Rebrand and Meet the Markles. She has also worked with the BBC and hosted major events like the BRIT and NME Awards.
  • Charli and Dixie D’Amelio: The D’Amelio sisters rose to fame on TikTok, with Charli becoming the platform’s first creator to surpass 100 million followers. They starred in Hulu’s The D’Amelio Show (2021–2023) and have since expanded into mainstream projects, including Charli’s roles in Apple TV+’s The Studio and the upcoming thriller Hurry Up Tomorrow.

Commercial considerations for content creators and production companies

As content creators become ever-more prominent in the TV world, their business operations also become more sophisticated and complex. Content creators are:

  • Establishing their own production companies and studios to scale their content, including hiring teams of writers, producers, directors and crew.
  • Developing their own YouTube channels.
  • Branching out into ancillary media avenues like podcasting and vodcasting.
  • Collaborating with traditional broadcasters and streamers, both on traditional platforms and on newer digital platforms.
  • Monetising and protecting their IP.
  • Generating income through securing brand deals, sharing sponsored posts, brand collaboration posts and product reviews, offering exclusive content to paying subscribers and even marketing and selling their own product lines.

Meanwhile, independent production companies are also wanting in on the action. We’re seeing a real uptick in interest from traditional production companies in creator-driven business, from traditional players making investments in new YouTube channels to pairing up with content creators to access brands to fund shows and have been advising production companies on how to structure such deals with content creators.

What legal issues does this present?

As with any industry disruptor, as content creators, indies and broadcasters lean into the opportunities presented by the new TV landscape, so too do the legal complexities grow. Some of the legal issues being grappled with are:

  • IP and rights management: protecting ownership of IP in the content being created and negotiating licensing terms with third parties who want to use it.
  • Production and talent contracts: as content creators increasingly act as producers, they are looking to engage third parties, or vice versa where the content creator is engaged by a streamer or studio. Negotiation of production and talent contracts is key.
  • Co-Production deals and contracts: where a content creator teams up with a larger, established production company in order to create a show.
  • Clearance issues: risks arise when content creators feature copyright protected or controversial material in their content.
  • Corporate structuring: many content creators are establishing their own production companies.
  • Corporate investment: content creators and traditional production companies, broadcasters and streamers are joining up and navigating commercial or equity partnerships and investments.
  • Employment: as content creators expand their businesses and begin hiring employees, they need to ensure they comply with employment laws, minimum wage and working hour regulations, as well as having workplace policies in place.
  • Advertising: content creators have no excuse for not complying with advertising standards, including the UK’s Advertising Standards Authority’s rules which affect transparency in marketing activities and other promotional content.
  • Compliance with regulations: content creators need to understand their obligations under the Online Safety Act 2023, which requires influencers to take greater responsibility for their content to prevent any harm to viewers, and under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024, which prohibits fake reviews and mandates transparency in endorsements.
  • Reputation management: this relates to protecting content creators’ online presence and public persona, personal and confidential material and privacy, as well as managing reputational risks and managing defamation claims and paparazzi intrusion.

What does the future hold?

The dominance of content creators in the modern entertainment landscape is undoubtedly here to stay. However, this doesn’t spell the end for traditional film and TV. By adapting to these shifts and seeking opportunities to collaborate with creators, traditional production companies and broadcasters can capitalise on the success of content creator-driven media. In fact, aligning themselves with the burgeoning ‘creator economy’ could not only help them stay relevant but also enhance their profitability.

Conversely, content creators aiming to maintain their loyal and dedicated audiences might find value in partnering with established industry players. Such collaborations help creators broaden their reach and also reinforce trust with their audience.

For more information or for advice on any of the above topics, please reach out to managing associate Clare McGarry.