KB-2025-003244 - [2025] EWHC 2386 (KB)

The Defendant’s proposed compromise is that he would agree not to (without the consent of the Claimant) (i) contact any fighter under contract with the Claimant, which he defines as a “Boxxer Fighter”; (ii) correspond with any promoter or broadcaster in relation to a Boxxer Fighter, for the purposes of that promoter or broadcaster contacting that Boxxer Fighter or otherwise interfering with that Boxxer Fighter’s contract; or (iii) contact any employees or staff of the Claimant in relation to their delivery or potential delivery of boxing-related activities.

Mr Miletic contended that determining the application in this way would be a just and convenient outcome, because (i) it provides the Claimant with the peace of mind (to the extent it is needed) that it can carry on its business free of alleged potential interference from the Defendant; (ii) it provides protection for the Claimant in respect of its business, fighters and staff; (iii) it leaves the Claimant free to provide its services to the BBC and others; and (iv) it allows the Defendant to continue working in the boxing industry, when there is only a limited window for him to do so before he retires, and to provide financial support for his family.

However, as Mr Cleaver highlighted, the compromise offer effectively pre-supposes that the Defendant will set up in competition with the Claimant which is the very thing the injunction seeks to restrain. Ultimately the parties may decide to compromise the Claimant’s claim on terms along these lines. However I am satisfied that this compromise offer does not address the issues underpinning this injunction application and does not sufficiently “hold the ring” until trial.