A Nevada judge has issued preliminary approval for a $375 million settlement to conclude the first of two antitrust lawsuits against the UFC.
Last month, UFC’s parent company TKO Group and the plaintiffs in the Le v. Zuffa case agreed to settle a class action lawsuit. On Tuesday, Judge Richard Franklin Boulware II approved the terms of the agreement, ending the decade-long litigation.
A hearing for final approval will be held in the coming months, and the final payout to the several hundred fighters involved will be calculated after legal fees are paid.
“Today’s decision is welcome news for both parties,” a UFC spokesperson said in a statement to ESPN. “We are pleased to be another step closer to bringing the Le case to a close.”
Eric Cramer, lead attorney for the plaintiffs, said they were “extremely pleased” by Boulware’s decision.
“It is a monumental achievement that will get significant relief to hundreds of deserving MMA fighters,” Cramer said in a statement to MMA Fighting. “We honor our brave representative plaintiffs who fought for this result for ten years. And we look forward to pursuing significant business changes and more damages in our second antitrust case against the UFC.
In July, Boulware denied the first proposed settlement agreement of $335 million, saying the amount was too low as it combined two different lawsuits. The $375 million figure agreed to in September focused solely on the Le v. Zuffa case, which covered fighters from 2010 to 2017.
With the settlement pending, more than 150 fighters involved in the lawsuit provided statements urging for the amount to be approved as soon as possible. Many fighters cited financial hardships and physical ailments in their statements.
“I face serious challenges in meeting basic everyday expenses for food, shelter and transportation and in basic life skills necessary to function,” said Shane Carwin, a former UFC interim heavyweight champion, who added that he suffers from CTE. This would truly be life-changing money for me and for other members of the class.
The antitrust lawsuit dates to 2014, when Zuffa was accused of violating antitrust laws by paying UFC fighters less than they were entitled to and hurting other MMA promoters with those practices. The lawsuit alleged that the UFC had gained an unfair advantage in the MMA industry through years of anticompetitive tactics and engaged “in a scheme to acquire and maintain monopsony power in the market for elite professional MMA fighter services.”
The UFC had defended itself by saying it had invested in the sport and citing rival promotions that have emerged over the past three decades as evidence of an equal playing field.
The other antitrust lawsuit, Johnson v. Zuffa, which covers fighters from 2017 to the present, remains in court. That antitrust lawsuit seeks permanent changes to both UFC contracts and the promotion’s business practices.
