Proactive Sports Management Ltd v Rooney & Ors (Rev 1)

Proactive Sports Management Ltd v Rooney & Ors (Rev 1)

The Image Rights Representation Agreement is unenforceable as an unreasonable restraint of trade due to its unique eight-year exclusive term, lack of negotiation, and imbalance of bargaining power. Proactive is not entitled to post-termination commission, but is entitled to a restitutionary quantum meruit for services rendered and accepted by Stoneygate and Speed prior to the breakdown of relations. No contractual or restitutionary claim arises for sums accruing after the relationship ended.

Parties
Claimant: Proactive Sports Management Limited; Defendant: Wayne Rooney; Defendant: Coleen Rooney (formerly McLoughlin); Defendant: Stoneygate 48 Limited; Defendant: Speed 9849 Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 July 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil (commercial/contract) / Final Judgment After Full Trial
Outcome
Claim for contractual commission and damages dismissed; quantum meruit allowed for pre-termination services; counterclaim for VAT dismissed.
Legal Topics
Agency Agreements, Image Rights, Quantum Meruit, Mistake, Restraint of Trade, Post Termination Commission, Exclusive Agency, Unenforceable Contracts, Restitutionary Remedies
Contract Law Sports Law Restitution Restraint of Trade Agency Agreements Image Rights Quantum Meruit Mistake +4 more

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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Proactive Sports Management Limited

Claimant

Wayne Rooney

Defendant

Coleen Rooney (formerly McLoughlin)

Defendant

Stoneygate 48 Limited

Defendant

Speed 9849 Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (commercial/contract) / Final Judgment After Full Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Image Rights Representation Agreement between Proactive and Stoneygate is void for mistake or unenforceable as an unreasonable restraint of trade
  2. 2 Whether Proactive is entitled to post-termination commission under the agreement
  3. 3 Whether Proactive is entitled to a restitutionary quantum meruit if the contract is unenforceable

Ratio Decidendi

The Image Rights Representation Agreement is unenforceable as an unreasonable restraint of trade due to its unique eight-year exclusive term, lack of negotiation, and imbalance of bargaining power. Proactive is not entitled to post-termination commission, but is entitled to a restitutionary quantum meruit for services rendered and accepted by Stoneygate and Speed prior to the breakdown of relations. No contractual or restitutionary claim arises for sums accruing after the relationship ended.

Court Disposition

Claim for contractual commission and damages dismissed; quantum meruit allowed for pre-termination services; counterclaim for VAT dismissed.

Orders

  • Proactive's contractual claims against Stoneygate and Speed dismissed as unenforceable for restraint of trade.
  • Proactive entitled to restitutionary quantum meruit for services rendered up to October 2008, amount to be assessed.