What is it about West Indies cricket that keeps making the headlines? If it’s not teams failing to appear at limited overs finals, then it might be how to discipline a player who walks off the field during a game. When we leave the pitch and head into the boardroom, controversy is not far away. In a dispute that truly reflected Caribbean sports law, Cricket West Indies (CWI), legally incorporated in the British Virgin Islands, found itself in a Guyanese court in a battle involving a Trinbagonian administrator and a Barbadian lawyer!
Fast forward to 2025 and already, another conflict is brewing as the International Cricket Council (ICC), with some influential support, is considering splitting test cricket into two tiers. Time alone will tell if they get “court” behind or “court” in the slips.
It is indisputable that the commercialisation of the sports sector has significantly changed its legal landscape and governance framework in recent decades. The region has become more acquainted with terminology once reserved only for lawyers. Injunctions, pre-action protocols, collective bargaining agreements, and sponsorship contracts are terms that avid sports fans now use with greater confidence. In fact, in November 2024, under the theme ‘Lex Sportiva: The Olympics and the World of Sport’, the Faculty of Law and the Faculty of Sport at the St Augustine Campus of the University of the West Indies (“The UWI”) welcomed a wide range of stakeholders to examine the overlap between sport and the law.
One notable discussion at the UWI conference was the passage of “sunset legislation” in Guyana, Barbados, Trinidad and Tobago, and Antigua and Barbuda, as the West Indies and the USA jointly hosted the men’s 2024 ICC T20 World Cup. The laws were enacted only for the event and a short period thereafter, replicating the legislation passed in 2006 when the West Indies subsequently hosted the 50-over ICC World Cup in 2007. The respective statutes aimed to protect valuable intellectual property rights belonging to the ICC, CWI, and their commercial partners. In 2024, legislators instituted measures to ensure that non-sponsors did not unlawfully piggyback off the goodwill and reputation of the World Cup and those legitimately affiliated with it.
Connected to those discussions is the broader landscape of intellectual property rights for cricketers and celebrities in general. Members of the Jamaican public may remember the 1994 landmark decision of the Supreme Court in Robert Marley Foundation v Dino Michelle Ltd, where Justice Clarke ruled that Bob Marley’s name, image, and likeness had commercial value both in Jamaica and internationally. As a result, without specific image rights legislation, Marley’s legal team could rely on the law of tort, including the claim of appropriation of personality, to protect Marley’s rights even after his death.
Although no sports-related image rights case has been decided in Caribbean courts, it is becoming more evident that our athletes understand that their face, voice, signature, silhouette, jersey number, nickname, and celebratory poses have revenue-generating potential. For instance, Usain Bolt, Dwayne Bravo, and Shelley-Ann Fraser-Pryce have vigilant legal teams who have either registered trademarks associated with their clients or created popular merchandising lines with legal protection. It would not be fanciful to suppose that Olympic sprint champion Julien Alfred of St Lucia, Manchester City standout Khadija Shaw of Jamaica and Dominica’s triple jump gold medalist Thea LaFond have joined the growing list of Caribbean athletes who understand their commercial worth and are seeking to monetise that value.
The past year also saw the heartbreaking story of Jamaican hammer thrower Nayoka Clunis, who was unable to participate despite her eligibility for Paris Olympics 2024. This unfortunate turn of events occurred after the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) ruled that her dispute did not fall within the ten days preceding the opening ceremony, so that the merits of her non-inclusion could not even be ventilated. Many times, we Caribbean people are accused of consistently being late. This was a case where, strangely enough, Klunis was too early. Since the substance of her matter arose in the first week of July 2024 and the opening ceremony was on July 26th, the CAS Ad Hoc Division, on location in Paris, had no jurisdiction to hear Clunis’ claim.
The year 2025, therefore, promises to be fascinating regionally and globally. Whether we are considering the pending doping case involving world number one tennis player Jannik Sinner, or the long-awaited ruling on the 115 charges faced by Manchester City, there is much to grab our attention in the months ahead. Our eyes are sure to be fixed on both courts.
J. Tyrone Marcus is a lecturer in law at the University of the West Indies, St. Augustine Campus, the author of Sports Law in Trinidad and Tobago and the co-author of Commonwealth Caribbean Sports Law.