Teams & Riders Israel Premier Tech

[aphronesis]

The UCI is based in Switzerland; presumably why contract disputes would be subject to Swiss law.

@RHD: kidnapping a rider probably wouldn’t produce the best results without dragging their family into it.

 

[search]

The UCI is based in Switzerland; presumably why contract disputes would be subject to Swiss law.

not in general, but checking again, yeah, Benson was indeed talking about the UCI Arbitral Board, which decides under Swiss law.

 

[aphronesis]

It could be a mess otherwise.

So you’re making a distinction between basic procedural issues and more ethical ones as in this case?

 

[search]

It could be a mess otherwise.

So you’re making a distinction between basic procedural issues and more ethical ones as in this case?

I was just thinking local law would have privilege, as for example for the Belgian riders breaking their contract. But according to the "Cycle Counsel" website, both options exist:

"For riders in UCI Men’s WorldTeams and ProTeams a rider or team may only submit such disputes to the Arbitral Board, the arbitral tribunal of the rider’s National Federation, the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), or the civil courts of the rider’s place of residence (without prejudice to the compulsory jurisdiction of ordinary courts)."

Understanding the UCI Arbitral Board: Powers and Procedure

The UCI Arbitral Board serves as the primary legal forum for disputes between cyclists and teams regarding employment contracts. This article provides a guide aimed at riders on the key procedural …

cyclecounsel.com

from the UAB, next step would be CAS then:

"Finally, it is worth noting that a decision of the Arbitral Board is not necessarily the end of the road for a dispute. The UCI Regulations allow any party dissatisfied with an Arbitral Board ruling to appeal to the CAS."

No idea on what grounds exactly the UAB usually decides, or who even brought it up there. I guess the team?

 

[aphronesis]

So as ever it seems arbitrary and arcane. Potentially prejudicial. But people got paid to write it out.

 

[CyclistAbi]

Do I understand this correctly?
As far as TTFKAIPT are concerned, Gee-West is still contracted with them?
UCI rules states that if a rider is contracted with a team, said rider must actually race for them - unless injured/sick, of course - which, I guess, is to prevent situations where a rider is leaving and ends up getting side-lined.
How would they - the team - do that? Not like they can kidnap him, and drag him to races...
I suppose they could... but it would be morally questionable.

First of all Derek terminated his contract lawfully and hence he is free to sign for whatever team he chooses in terms of racing in the 2026 season and UCI will need to register him as such. Secondly IPT and this new "Swiss" team won't be the same legal entity and hence all rider contracts would need to be resigned anyway. All riders and staff are hence free to do so or they can choose not to do that. Here the problem usually is the exact opposite, some pressure being applied for trying to secure most employees to get a chance to sign a new contract. Froome, for example, might try with a lawsuit, chances to succeed slim, maybe he would get some damages from his old team (IPT).

 

[CyclistAbi]

While we are at "Swiss" branding/trademark the criteria is rather strict. Unless i guess you don't operate from Switzerland and use such label for advertising purposes. In Slovenia we recently had an affair on where Swiss beds turned out not to be as Swiss as one might expect.

 

[AmRacer]

First of all Derek terminated his contract lawfully and hence he is free to sign for whatever team he chooses in terms of racing in the 2026 season and UCI will need to register him as such. Secondly IPT and this new "Swiss" team won't be the same legal entity and hence all rider contracts would need to be resigned anyway. All riders and staff are hence free to do so or they can choose not to do that. Here the problem usually is the exact opposite, some pressure being applied for trying to secure most employees to get a chance to sign a new contract. Froome, for example, might try with a lawsuit, chances to succeed slim, maybe he would get some damages from his old team (IPT).

1. It isn't settled yet?
2. Froome's contract has expired, nothing to file a lawsuit for.

 

[CyclistAbi]

2. Froome's contract has expired, nothing to file a lawsuit for.

I didn't check and assumed he signed for longer then up to and including the 2025 season so indeed nothing here to potentially sue your old team about.

 

[aphronesis]

If anything it would sue him. Probably not built into the overhyped contract.

 

[CyclistAbi]

If anything it would sue him. Probably not built into the overhyped contract.

Good luck with that one.

 

[aphronesis]

It’s amusing and not out of bounds. Realistically no, and more depressing as you suggest.

 

[CyclistAbi]

@aphronesis

I didn't know the contract in between Froome and IPT already expired when giving the example above. So now that this got sorted out it's rather pointless to discuss this further hypothetically. Can still apply to any other rider or staff member that has (had) a valid contract with IPT for the 2026 season or beyond.

As for the rest, there actually is a variety of reasons on why a team could terminate a contract with their rider lawfully. Lets say due to doping or due to reasons on why Derek could lawfully terminate his contract with IPT. That works both ways.

Anyway, due to this being more of an arbitrage then real court ultimately likely no real decision will be made, beyond the case resolving itself. Due to IPT as a legal entity ceasing to exist, there is nothing more UCI needs to do, or decide, regarding Derek and IPT. Private lawsuit is still possible but that is of no real interest ATM on where it comes to UCI and the decision to register Derek as a rider for some team going into 2026 season.