On 18 March 2025, the Professional Tennis Players Association (PTPA), co-founded by Novak Djokovic and Vasek Pospisil, filed a lengthy antitrust class action in the US federal court for the Southern District of New York against the ATP, WTA, the International Tennis Federation (ITF) and the International Tennis Integrity Agency (ITIA). In the complaint, the players accuse tennis’s governing structures of acting as a cartel, keeping prize money at artificially low levels, allocating less than 20% of overall revenues to players, imposing an eleven-month calendar and using the ranking system to restrict professional freedom and discourage competing events.
Over the summer, the case widened. On 23 September 2025, the PTPA applied for, and obtained, permission to extend the lawsuit to the four Grand Slam organisers, including Tennis Australia, which is formally the owner and organiser of the Australian Open. From that moment the Majors entered the proceedings as alleged “co-conspirators”, without changing the substance of the accusations already levelled at the Tours.
The turning point came in November. On 19 November 2025, the PTPA’s lawyers filed a letter addressed to Judge Margaret Garnett, again at the Southern District of New York, stating that the claimants and Tennis Australia were engaged in “substantive and productive bilateral settlement discussions”, and that an agreement on the claims relating to the Australian federation was “likely in the near future”. In the same communication, the parties asked for procedural deadlines to be stayed in respect of Tennis Australia only, while the case would continue as normal against the other defendants.
The following day, 20 November 2025, international agencies and media picked up the story: the PTPA was close to a settlement with Tennis Australia in the lawsuit originally filed in March. In the statements reported, the Australian federation confirmed that the talks were at an advanced stage and made it clear that, if the New York court were to approve an agreement between the parties, it would exit the proceedings.
On one crucial point, however, the picture remains deliberately incomplete: the terms of any potential deal are unknown. No public document clarifies whether the negotiation table includes increases to the Australian Open prize money, commitments on the calendar, specific welfare measures for players or changes to governance. The reporting converges on a simple fact: both sides have chosen not to disclose the “content” of the possible agreement, limiting themselves to confirming that discussions are advanced and asking the judge for a targeted suspension of the case.
The timing helps to explain Melbourne’s move. The 2026 edition of the Australian Open is scheduled to start on 18 January at Melbourne Park. Arriving at that date with an antitrust trial in progress and its name listed among the alleged “co-conspirators” in a US federal lawsuit would mean assuming an obvious reputational risk. The joint request to stop the procedural clock, in view of a deal to be submitted for the court’s approval, is therefore also a risk-management exercise focused on Tennis Australia’s main economic and image asset.
Politically, the decision breaks the appearance of a united institutional front. Until now, the ATP and WTA had publicly rejected the accusations, describing the lawsuit as “without merit” and promising a vigorous defence; the other Slams had remained on the same line of outright rejection. Tennis Australia is the first Major organiser to take a different route: sitting down at the table, negotiating on its own behalf and seeking a bespoke stay of proceedings. How far this crack will affect the solidity of the Grand Slam Board, and the room for manoeuvre of the other three tournaments, will also depend on what the text of the agreement – if and when it becomes public – actually contains.
For the moment, the verifiable facts stop here: the action launched on 18 March 2025 remains fully active against the ATP, WTA, ITF, ITIA and the other Slam organisers; only Tennis Australia has chosen to freeze its own position and work on a possible separate way out. Everything else – from any financial commitments to potential structural reforms – remains behind closed doors.
Notes / main sources
[1] Text of the original complaint filed on 18 March 2025:
Pospisil et al. v. ATP Tour, Inc. et al., Southern District of New York, 1:25-cv-02207. PDF available at:
https://ptpaplayers.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Pospisil-et-al.-v.-ATP-Tour-Inc.-et-al.-Complaint.pdf
[2] Reuters, “Players suing ATP, WTA, others: ‘Tennis is broken’”, 18 March 2025 (on the substance of the PTPA lawsuit):
https://www.reuters.com/sports/tennis/players-suing-atp-wta-others-tennis-is-broken-2025-03-18/
[3] Sports Business Journal, “PTPA adds Grand Slams to ATP, WTA antitrust suit”, 23 September 2025 (on the Slams being added as defendants):
https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Articles/2025/09/23/ptpa-adds-grand-slams-to-atp-wta-antitrust-suit/
[4] LawInSport, “Break(ing) Point? The Antitrust Battle that Could Transform Professional Tennis”, 5 June 2025 (legal analysis of the PTPA case):
https://www.lawinsport.com/topics/item/break-ing-point-the-antitrust-battle-that-could-transform-professional-tennis
[5] Law360, “Tennis Australia Seeks Pause In Suit As Antitrust Deal Nears”, 19 November 2025 (on the letter to Judge Garnett and the request for a stay):
https://www.law360.com/articles/2413115/tennis-australia-seeks-pause-in-suit-as-antitrust-deal-nears
[6] Reuters, “Players’ association says close to deal with Tennis Australia over lawsuit”, 20 November 2025 (on confirmation of the near-agreement and the Australian Open 2026 context):
https://www.reuters.com/sports/tennis/players-association-says-close-deal-with-tennis-australia-over-lawsuit-2025-11-20/
[7] TennisUpToDate, “PTPA states they are close to settlement with Tennis Australia over lawsuit sent in March”, 20 November 2025 (on the letter and the targeted stay request):
https://tennisuptodate.com/tennis-news/ptpa-states-they-are-close-to-settlement-with-tennis-australia-over-lawsuit-sent-in-march
Follow Us