Why Mark Hunt has not Sued Lesnar but is Threatening to Sue Future Dopers

Posted: January 6, 2017 in Uncategorized

Update January 10, 2017 Interstingly Hunt has now sued the Zuffa, Dana White and Brock Lesnar.  He did not plead assault/battery as those causes of action are legally problematic as per below but did plead the following causes of action

  1. Unlawful Racketeering in violation of Federal law
  2. Unlawful Racketeering in violation of Nevada state law
  3. Fraud
  4. Obtaining Hunt’s Services (to fight Lesnar) under false pretenses
  5. Breach of Contract
  6. Breach of Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing
  7. Negligence
  8. Unjust Enrichment


After learning that his UFC 200 opponent was caught using prohibited substances Mark Hunt threatened to sue the UFC and Brock Lesnar going so far as to suggest litigation based on rackateering charges.  The “Super Samoan”also stated he likely was done fighting in the UFC given the unsafe working environment‘.

He has apparently backed down from this position now agreeing to fight Alistair Overeem at UFC 209.  

Hunt demanded stronger language added to his contracts in case a future opponent is found guilty of doping but his wishes have gone unanswered.  Hunt told New Zealand publication Stuff that he will outright sue any opponent who tests positive for steroids noting “Every fighter I fight, if he gets caught through the process then I’ll sue him personally…If I don’t get help from the company I’ll do it myself.

There is already a paper-trail of PED use for Lesnar so why not sue him?  The short answer is consent.  Hunt likely received legal advice that he shot his own chances of success in a Lesnar based lawsuit by some of his own statements.

In June 2016, prior to his bout with Lesnar who was under scrutiny for receiving a UFC hall pass from the normal 4 month mandatory testing period for returning athletes, Hunt stated he outright did not care if Lesnar was using performance enhancing drugs telling MMAJunkieI don’t care – everyone should be on a level playing field, to be honest, but it is what it is….I don’t care if you’re cheating or not. I’ll punch your face in. That’s all I’ve got.

Why would these comments undermine a potential Lesnar lawsuit?  Because lack of consent would be the cornerstone of a lawsuit against a fighter who cheated through illicit PED use.

As previously discussed a successful lawsuit against a PED using opponent would likely be based on the torts of assault/battery with the argument being that consent to fight did not exist against a doping opponent who fraudulently concealed PED use.

Despite all the risks, the fight game is allowed based on one fundamental principle, informed consent.  Adults generally can consent to engage in risky activity, even if it poses a risk of harm to themselves and their competitor.  Here the issue of ‘informed’ consent becomes crucial.  Relevant facts which can vitiate consent cannot be swept under the rug otherwise the integrity of the consent is compromised.

There is precedent that doping can undermine consent in combative sports and that concealed cheating can amount to “reckless assault” even on the criminal standard of ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’.

Hunt’s previous comments would seriously undermine a lawsuit against Lesnar.

His latest comments, on the other hand, help pave the road for a successful lawsuit should he face a future PED using opponent.  Hunt is building the framework of doping vitiating consent and will be on far stronger legal footing should he face yet another fighter testing positive for prohibited substances.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s