A federal jury has delivered a mixed outcome in the long‑running dispute between the International Swimming League and World Aquatics, confirming that the governing body engaged in an unlawful boycott
A US federal jury has ruled World Aquatics and several of its member federations engaged in an unlawful group boycott against the International Swimming League (ISL), but awarded the now‑inactive league just $1 in damages, bringing an anticlimactic end to one of the most significant antitrust battles in modern Olympic sport.
The verdict, delivered on January 23 in the US District Court for the Northern District of California, concludes the final strand of litigation stemming from the long‑running dispute over the global governing body’s efforts to block the ISL’s entry into elite swimming.
Jurors found World Aquatics (formerly FINA) and at least one national federation agreed not to deal with the ISL, that the parties were direct competitors, and that the boycott cut off ISL’s access to elite swimmers – an input the league needed to compete.
They also determined the conduct harmed competition and that the anticompetitive effects outweighed any claimed benefits.
However, despite siding with ISL on every major liability question, the jury concluded that the league failed to prove it suffered measurable financial losses as a result. The symbolic $1 award reflects a finding of legal injury without economic damages.
The final chapter of a broader antitrust saga
The verdict arrives four months after World Aquatics agreed to pay $4.6 million to settle a related class action brought by swimmers including Tom Shields, Michael Andrew and Katinka Hosszu.
This settlement compensated athletes who were affected when the ISL’s inaugural 2018 event was cancelled following threats of sanctions.
While the swimmers secured a substantial payout, ISL pursued its own case separately, arguing that World Aquatics’ rules and coordinated conduct prevented the league from establishing itself as a viable competitor.
The jury agreed on the core antitrust violation – echoing the Ninth Circuit’s 2024 ruling that a reasonable jury could find FINA’s rules “cut off ISL’s access to top‑tier professional swimmers” – but ultimately rejected ISL’s damages model.
Implications for World Aquatics
For the governing body, the verdict is a mixed outcome:
- It confirms that the organisation’s former regulatory framework created antitrust exposure.
- But it avoids any significant financial penalty beyond the earlier swimmer settlement.
- The current leadership has already distanced itself from the previous administration’s approach, emphasising reforms and increased athlete engagement.
The case now stands as a precedent in the ongoing debate over how far international federations can go in controlling athlete participation and protecting their commercial interests, with clear relevance to newer disputes such as the Enhanced Games’ antitrust challenge.
