Posting this again because I added some comments since this morning: Rampage is claiming that Bellator breached its contract with him. One thing to note immediately is that not all breaches provide you with an excuse for non-performance. A breach must be material in order for it to allow one side to void a contract. (The essential requirement for a material breach is that the non-breaching party did not receive the substantial benefit of the bargain.) If Bellators contract with Rampage is still valid, UFCs signing him away is a tortious interference with contract. Not only will it provide Bellator a viable tort claim against UFC, its going to provide ammunition to the plaintiffs suing UFC over unfair business practices. At the very least, UFC should have insisted that Rampage seek an advisory opinion from a court regarding the breach before re-signing him. From a legal perspective, this would have always been a problematic road for UFC to travel, but with the Antitrust lawsuit that was filed this week, it reaches a mind-blowing level of smugness and stupidity.
Posted on: Sun, 21 Dec 2014 17:48:40 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015