The LIV players pleading is interesting reading. It's written as if the aggrieved party is the LIV Tour rather than the players. Naturally, because the LIV Tour (Saudis) are fronting the legal fees. Also, among the elements that the players must prove to win is "irreparable harm" if they don't play in the PGAT Fed Ex playoffs. These are "pro" golfers, which means they play golf for money. Each of the players has made more money from playing a couple of LIV exhibitions than they ever would have made over the next decade on the PGAT. Hard to see the "harm" the players have suffered or will suffer when their bank accounts are flush from the Saudi money grab.
As mack put it, incredible irony that the Saudis are trying to use anti-trust law to takedown the PGAT. Anyone proposing an antitrust law in Saudi would be body bag.
Irreparable harm is harm that cannot be compensated by money. Sometimes the most sure-fire defense to an injunction is that one can quantify an injury in dollars. Here, if these players compete in the FedEx Cup, they might win a lot, a little, or no money depending on how they play. So their damages are speculative. I don't know what the Court does there, but I would bet they argue they cannot be adequately compensated by damages because of the speculative element.
Otherwise, I am no anti-trust lawyer either, but anti-competitive conduct such as non-competition restrictions generally stand if they comport with applicable law. Florida law may apply due to the PGA Tour's headquarters' presence there and whatever the players agree to by contract, and Florida courts routinely uphold non-competes. California does not permit similar restrictions, however. Sounds like they are making the anti-competitive argument from additional conduct (e.g., collusion with DP, majors, etc.). Should be an interesting legal battle, but these LIV guys do look like a bunch of whiny brats, that is for sure.
Last edited: