Legal analyst and former WWE Superstar David Otunga believes a judge would likely rule in Andrade’s favor if the wrestler took WWE to court over his non-compete clause. Otunga provided a legal breakdown of the situation, explaining the contractual issues at play.
Otunga presented a hypothetical scenario to illustrate the clause’s potential for exploitation. “Under this non-compete clause, technically, a talent could sign a contract, WWE could turn around the next day and fire them for no cause, and then say, ‘Hey, we’re not going to pay you for one year and you can’t wrestle anywhere else for one year.’ This is in the contract. This would be enforceable, presuming this contract is valid.”
He continued by stating his belief that WWE would not want this clause to be challenged in a legal setting. “They don’t want talent to take them to court and challenge this because a judge would likely rule this invalid,” Otunga said.
Otunga’s legal reasoning centers on the restriction of trade without compensation. “The fact that you’re preventing somebody from working to support themselves in their given field for an entire year and you’re not compensating them… I don’t know how they could enforce this.”
He concluded with a firm opinion on the likely outcome of a court case. “If he were to take this to court, I think a judge is very likely to rule in his favor and just throw out the entire clause in the contract,” Otunga stated. “You can’t prevent somebody from earning a living for an entire year.”
If you use any portion of the quotes from this article, please credit David Otunga YouTube channel with a h/t to WrestlngNews.co for the transcription.
