BoxRec

interesting, thanks

Be surprised if he aint ringside for Froch next to Barker and Brook.

I am not really surprised to hear that Bomber has chosen to leave allegedly. He wants to fight on Sky television so he can get more exposure, which is what he was not getting on allegedly.

If BBBoC go through with their banning threats and Warren gets banned do you think his fighters will be allowed to leave due to breach of contract? wont their contracts be null and void?

Can't help but wonder about the long term harm being done to this promoter's future prospects of signing fighters... if there was a league table of promoters who's fighters leave in acrimony, surely he'd top it by a mile. I suppose the biggest draw for fighters will always be who pays the most money and who has a track record of steering fighters to successful careers but he's developing another track record with DeGale and Bellew openly wanting to leave and being threatened with legal action unless they stay. Once upon a time it was guys like Naz, Calzaghe and Hatton who'd reached the top and didn't fancy giving away a slice of massive paydays, but now its boxers on the way up who want to leave. Can't see any olympians wanting to sign a contract with him.

Well I hope that Tony has got a good legal firm behind him.
I would like to know the basis upon which he believes his contract is over.
Let the Board decide ......

twenty six wrote:Well I hope that Tony has got a good legal firm behind him.
I would like to know the basis upon which he believes his contract is over.
Let the Board decide ......

Which one? BBBofC or the Lux factor??

smoggy7188 wrote:Be surprised if he aint ringside for Froch next to Barker and Brook.

Hope so

Has Bellew declared his hand a tadge too early I wonder?

twenty six wrote:Well I hope that Tony has got a good legal firm behind him.
I would like to know the basis upon which he believes his contract is over.
Let the Board decide ......

I agree with the majority of what you had to say until the last line, it seems BBBofC are more intent on arguing about their bus passes and ensuring they have a place in the local care home than sorting out British Boxing.

Their hesitant and inconsistent approach to the sport is why it is in the mess it is now.

How long has Bellew got left on his contract with FW?

Unless both parties agree to terminate the contract they are notoriously hard to get out of. In some instances the promoter/manager will let the fighter go wherever he wants as long as he still creams his 25% whenever he fights.

The Insider wrote:How long has Bellew got left on his contract with FW?

Unless both parties agree to terminate the contract they are notoriously hard to get out of. In some instances the promoter/manager will let the fighter go wherever he wants as long as he still creams his 25% whenever he fights.

Warren may have no choice but to let Bellew box on another promoters show,especially if its a purse bids situation, but, he will receive his contractural payment in return. I think Junior Witter boxed a number of times under the same type of arrangement.

Can anyone post an example of a recent boxer / promoter contract?

Superheavy wrote:Can anyone post an example of a recent boxer / promoter contract?

The template contract document is available to download off the BBBOC website.

Maybe Warren hasn't yet paid Bomber for the Clev fight (as mooted). Could that allow termination of contract?

Who knows eh.

Cockney,
If Tony has a mandated fight then it goes to purse bids.
There is nothing to say that Wazza might win that bid or any other Promotor for that matter.
This is how Tony fought on a Coldwell / Hearn joint Promotion after Dave put in the winning bid.
However for any voluntary fights Tony is bound by his existing contract - which I believe is both a Promotional and a Managerial contract.
Wazza is expected to act "in the best interests" of his Client.
However I would be astonished if Wazza would simply allow Tony to fight on a competitors Promotion.
If he did, he would still be entitled to his Promotion /Management cut.
Generally that's 25%.
As for the Board it is written in stone that neither party can resort to commercial litigation until such time as the Board have given their adjudication.
What Im saying is that when I say let the Board decide - they are the rules.
I'm surprised that Tony has gone public.
These disputes run and run and run.
What no one knows is how long Tony has left on his existing contract, and the basis upon which Tony believes there has been a breach of contract.
I'd just add that costs cannot be recovered by either party if successful so I hope Tony has got a "fighting fund" to take the matter forward.
I wish him all the best.

Bacca,
If that was the case then yes - Wazza could hardly say he has acted in the best interests of his Client.
However we don't know the reason and quite frankly it's none of our business.

Unfortunately there are many so called experts on this forum who have no idea of contractual law .
Contractual disputes are determined by the Law of the Land not by the Board
Warren v Mendy highlights this .
Breaches are breaches in any contract and termination can be given .
Bellew is a free agent , let Warren huff and puff all he wants .
Bellew is FREE

THT,
Can you specifically state what you believe the breach to be ?
I can assure you it is correct to say that a Board adjudication is required before civil litigation can commence.
If Tony doesn't take the correct route then Wazza will ask the Board not to sanction his fights or indeed may seek a suspension of his licence.

Twenty Six
You are wrong .

twenty six wrote:Bacca,
If that was the case then yes - Wazza could hardly say he has acted in the best interests of his Client.
However we don't know the reason and quite frankly it's none of our business.

All speculation.

THT,
Let's just agree to disagree then.
Having lived through this very scenario for a total of three years I can only cite from my experience.

twenty six wrote:THT,
Can you specifically state what you believe the breach to be ?
I can assure you it is correct to say that a Board adjudication is required before civil litigation can commence.
If Tony doesn't take the correct route then Wazza will ask the Board not to sanction his fights or indeed may seek a suspension of his licence.

Sorry 26 but you are way out of order on this one.

The Promotional Contract used by allegedly Promotions Limited (FWP) is not the BBBoC official Promoter/Boxer Contract (Form 35). This contract is used by a Promoter licenced by the Board to promote Contests and Tournaments.

FWP are a private limited company and DO NOT have a licence from the Board to promote anything. The licenced Promoter who uses/pays FWP to do the actual work is Mr. allegedly, who at law, is a totally separate legal entity and if you go to any event organised by allegedly you will see his licence displayed, as is required by the Rules and Regulations of the Board, above the ticket office not FWP.

The Board has no say or influence over contracts made with third parties but you would be correct if the contract was with a licenced Promoter on a BBBoC Form 35.

Regulation 13.1 of the BBBoC approved Boxer/Manager Agreement states, "The Boxer or the Manager may determine this Agreement by notice in writing if the other party:
13.1(i) Is guilty of any serious breach of his obligation under it; or

This regulation is totally separate from the arbitration clause which deals with resolution of disputes between the parties by arbitration by the Board.

In any event Regulation 17 states “This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with English Law” and redress to which a party may feel entitled should be determined by the Courts.

And further, for your information, the leading authority on contracts which involve the exercise of a special skill or talent and a high degree of mutual trust is, Warren v Mendy. [1989] 3 All ER 103. A case which was decided in the Court of Appeal before Purchas, Nourse and Stuart-Smith LJJ (LJJ means Lords Justices) on the 14 February 1989.

The ratio decidendi in this case established that no person involved in such proceedings could be ordered to carry out specific performance of the contract. Any remedy for wrongful breach therefore, in the event that the contract was determined by the Court to have been wrongfully repudiated, lies in damages only.

In plain English, even if a Boxer is determined by the Court to have wrongfully repudiated a contract, he WILL NOT be made to continue with that contract. Therefore he is a free agent.

Does this help to clear things up?

Why am I out of order ?
I am simply stating things from my own experience.
If you read my earlier posts I have said that unless you have all the facts then no one can state specifically what the situation is.
Was I aware of the basis of Tony's contract before your post ?
No.
Now that you are clarifying that the contract is not on a form 35 basis then it takes on a different light.
For the avoidance of any doubt whatsoever, do not assume I am backing Oh Worthy One's position in this.
Nothing would please me more to see Tony fighting under a Promotional banner that gives him full exposure, and fighting on a regular basis (this being probably the most important thing).
I assumed that Oh Worthy One was also Tony's manager.
Is it the case that he is/was just Tony's Promotor ?