Riot Games’ International Arbitration Court: A new dawn for esports dispute resolution

The esports industry is growing and evolving at such a fast pace, that the relevant legal framework does not always keep up, in particular the fragmented governance and (the absence of) a specialised dispute resolution mechanism (see here and here).

But the landscape is changing. Earlier this year, Riot Games, one of the largest esports tournament organisers, established a new international arbitration court for its League of Legends and Valorant leagues in EMEA, indicating an industry shift towards formalised dispute resolution. This blog discusses the setup of the arbitration court and the features it needs to become a trusted and efficient tribunal.

Riot Games’ new arbitration court

The arbitration court launched by Riot Games is designed to handle all contractual and financial disputes between (i) teams, (ii) players, and (iii) coaches in Tier 1 and Tier 2 competitions in League of Legends and Valorant, two of the largest esports titles worldwide. Addressing over 200 teams, more than 1,500 players, and 400 coaches, the court aims to resolve commercial disputes in relation to, for example, unpaid salaries and transfer restrictions, excluding those involving Riot Games itself, with a view to enhancing contractual stability and simplifying dispute resolution in an industry which spans multiple jurisdictions.

Disputes will involve a sole arbitrator with generally one round of written submissions and no communicated reasons for a decision. Administrative fees range from €500 to €4,000, with arbitrator fees between €1,000 and €5,000. A new Riot Games’ Legal Aid Fund will support those unable to pay. Arbitration will be governed by Swiss law. Riot Games will enforce the awards and take disciplinary action for non-compliance, in line with the Esports Global Code of Conduct.

Decision-making focuses on equity and fairness (ex aequo et bono), rather than strict legal interpretation in order to provide a cost-effective and expedient method of dispute resolution. This approach aims to mitigate barriers to entry for parties lacking professional legal counsel, particularly in Tier 2 league disputes. Riot Games is actively encouraging the inclusion of arbitration clauses in employment contracts to avoid potentially costly national litigation, aiming for eventual use in over 80% of employment contracts within its EMEA leagues.

Impact and implications

Riot Games' recent establishment of a dedicated arbitration court specifically for professional and semi-professional leagues in its League of Legends and Valorant ecosystems marks a significant advancement in professional standards and contractual integrity. By providing a swift and straightforward mechanism for resolving disputes, such as unpaid salaries and transfer disagreements, this new court is poised to enhance contractual stability, thereby supporting the long-term development and maturity of the esports industry in the region. However, the overarching governance and dispute resolution in the esports industry remains fragmented, as various institutions and game developers continue to self-regulate. While Riot Games' move offers a potentially more efficient forum for resolving disputes related to League of Legends and Valorant, it also adds yet another arbitration court to an already divided landscape. This fragmentation poses challenges, as inconsistent regulation and enforcement can undermine commercial certainty and restrict further financial investment in the industry.

Looking ahead

While a universally accepted dispute resolution forum for the esports industry has yet to be established, the demand for such a mechanism is likely to grow in tandem with its economic expansion and the complexity of its dynamics. A single court of arbitration with industry backing and specialist esports arbitrators would, for example, foster collaboration between developers, operators, participants, and governing bodies, ultimately fostering the long-term sustainability, stability and integrity of the industry.

It will be interesting to observe whether, as the need becomes more pronounced, a new entity like Riot Games' court of arbitration will serve as the basis for a unified dispute resolution mechanism, or if an existing institution, such as the Court of Arbitration for Sport, will evolve itself to assume this role.

Stakeholders should closely monitor these developments as the landscape of dispute resolution within the esports industry evolves rapidly.

Sign up to SportingLinks for more dedicated legal opinion on topical issues in the sports sector.