Two former junior hockey players have ended their legal battle against the National Hockey League (NHL) and the Canadian Hockey League (CHL). Their lawsuit, filed earlier this year, accused the leagues of suppressing compensation and restricting player movement in junior hockey systems. The withdrawal follows a federal court decision last month to remove the CHL and its affiliates from the case due to jurisdictional limits.
U.S. District Judge Margaret Garnett ruled in November that her court did not have jurisdiction over the CHL, a Canadian-based organization. This left the NHL as the sole defendant in the case. With the CHL removed and the NHL’s motion to dismiss still pending, the players opted to voluntarily withdraw their lawsuit. They did not provide any reasons for their decision.
The lawsuit claimed that the CHL used “no poach” agreements among its leagues to restrict player transfers and reduce career opportunities for young athletes. It also alleged that the NHL’s developmental partnership with the CHL constituted an illegal conspiracy under competition laws. The NHL consistently denied these claims, arguing that its agreements were both legal and beneficial to the sport.
Initially proposed as a class action, the case was intended to address what the plaintiffs viewed as systemic unfairness in junior hockey development systems. However, the court’s dismissal of the CHL significantly weakened the lawsuit’s scope and may have influenced the players’ decision to withdraw.
Filed under the title World Association of Icehockey Players Unions North America Division v. National Hockey League, the case was being heard in the Southern District of New York. Despite the dismissal, it raises broader questions about player rights, compensation, and mobility in hockey’s developmental leagues.
