The case for specific performance as remedy for breach of athletes' contracts
by Kenneth Mould; Steve Cornelius
International Journal of Private Law (IJPL), Vol. 8, No. 3/4, 2017

Abstract: The purpose of this article is to suggest to South African courts that specific performance is the most adequate remedy for breach of athletes' contracts. The current viewpoint of South African courts as to whether specific performance is in fact the most adequate remedy for breach of athletes' contracts, will be compared with that of courts within the federal government system of the USA. The reason for choosing this jurisdiction is twofold: firstly, the USA has a particularly rich history of disputes involving repudiation of athletes' contracts and which remedies courts preferred for this type of breach, and secondly, a number of reputable scholars of US sports law have suggested that US courts should consider ordering affirmative injunctions against repudiating athletes - despite the Lumley rule which is considered the primary indicator of the most adequate remedy for breach of athletes' contracts in US law.

Online publication date: Fri, 13-Oct-2017

The full text of this article is only available to individual subscribers or to users at subscribing institutions.

 
Existing subscribers:
Go to Inderscience Online Journals to access the Full Text of this article.

Pay per view:
If you are not a subscriber and you just want to read the full contents of this article, buy online access here.

Complimentary Subscribers, Editors or Members of the Editorial Board of the International Journal of Private Law (IJPL):
Login with your Inderscience username and password:

Username:        Password:          Forgotten your password?

Want to subscribe?
A subscription gives you complete access to all articles in the current issue, as well as to all articles in the previous three years (where applicable). See our Orders page to subscribe.

If you still need assistance, please email subs@inderscience.com