The NHL concussion litigation – a second-class settlement?
Published 31 December 2018 By: Henry Goldschmidt
On 12 November 2018, it was announced that the National Hockey League (NHL or League) had agreed a tentative settlement with several hundred former players who had sued the League on the basis that it had not done enough to protect them from the dangers of head trauma. In short, the lawsuit alleged that the NHL had negligently:
- failed to warn its players of the short/long-term consequences of repeated concussions and head trauma,
- failed to sufficiently care for its players after such injuries, and
- promoted gratuitous violence, precipitating those very head injuries.
Although the terms of the settlement are subject to a 75-day “opt-in” period for the individual claimants (and would also need to receive judicial approval), comparisons are already being made with the National Football League (NFL) litigation settlement.
Despite the apparent similarities, however, there are key differences between the NHL and NFL cases that have ultimately meant that – in raw economic terms – the corresponding settlements are chalk and cheese. In this article, the author will consider:
- the terms of the NHL settlement (including how and why they differ from the NFL settlement);
- who might be considered the winners and losers in the NHL settlement;
- the significance of “class-action” status in US proceedings; and
- the relevance of the NHL and NFL lawsuits should similar proceedings arise in the courts of England and Wales.
Get access to this article and all of the expert analysis and commentary at LawInSport
Already a member?
Articles, webinars, conference videos and podcast transcripts
This work was written for and first published on LawInSport.com (unless otherwise stated) and the copyright is owned by LawInSport Ltd. Permission is granted to make digital or hard copies of this work (or part, or abstracts, of it) for personal use provided copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage, and provided that all copies bear this notice and full citation on the first page (which should include the URL, company name (LawInSport), article title, author name, date of the publication and date of use) of any copies made. Copyright for components of this work owned by parties other than LawInSport must be honoured.
- Tags: Athlete Welfare | Civil Procedure Rules | Concussion | Consumer Rights Act 2015 | Dispute Resolution | Employment | Federal Rules of Civil Procedure | Ice Hockey | National Football League (NFL) | National Hockey League (NHL) | USA
- How the latest technological advances in diagnosing concussion could influence sports policy
- Global concussion education reaches 61,000 new participants in 2017
- The new blood test for traumatic brain injury and what it may mean for athlete welfare
- NHL expansion: The formation of the Vegas Golden Knights
Henry Goldschmidt is an associate at Morgan Sports Law, specialising in arbitration and litigation. He trained at Lawrence Graham (now Gowling WLG), qualifying into their dispute resolution team. After four years doing commercial litigation and international arbitration, he joined MSL in September 2016. Henry has particular interests in anti-doping, concussion and match-fixing.