Stretford v The Football Association Ltd. & Anor

Stretford v The Football Association Ltd. & Anor

Rule K was incorporated into the contract between Mr Stretford and The FA. The events of the 2 September 2005 meeting did not preclude The FA from relying on Rule K. The arbitration agreement was not null, void, or inoperative; by agreeing to arbitration, the parties voluntarily and unequivocally waived their Article 6 ECHR rights to a public hearing and a tribunal established by law. There was no compulsion, duress, or public interest reason to invalidate the waiver. The proceedings were properly stayed under section 9(4) of the Arbitration Act 1996.

Parties
Claimant: Paul Stretford; Defendant: The Football Association Ltd; Defendant: Mr Bright
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 March 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Arbitration Agreements, Article 6 ECHR, Waiver of Rights, Restraint of Trade, Disciplinary Proceedings in Sport
Arbitration Sports Law Human Rights Arbitration Agreements Article 6 ECHR Waiver of Rights Restraint of Trade Disciplinary Proceedings in Sport

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Paul Stretford

Claimant

The Football Association Ltd

Defendant

Mr Bright

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Rule K arbitration clause was incorporated into the contract between Mr Stretford and The FA
  2. 2 Whether the events of the 2 September 2005 meeting precluded The FA from relying on Rule K
  3. 3 Whether Rule K is null and void or inoperative under section 9(4) of the Arbitration Act 1996 due to conflict with Article 6 ECHR

Ratio Decidendi

Rule K was incorporated into the contract between Mr Stretford and The FA. The events of the 2 September 2005 meeting did not preclude The FA from relying on Rule K. The arbitration agreement was not null, void, or inoperative; by agreeing to arbitration, the parties voluntarily and unequivocally waived their Article 6 ECHR rights to a public hearing and a tribunal established by law. There was no compulsion, duress, or public interest reason to invalidate the waiver. The proceedings were properly stayed under section 9(4) of the Arbitration Act 1996.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Stay of proceedings ordered by the Chancellor maintained