The breakaway players’ union that is suing the tours and grand slam tournaments has thrown its weight behind Tara Moore’s $20m (£14.7m) legal battle against the Women’s Tennis Association in a new front in the sport’s civil war.
The Guardian has learned that Moore, the former British No 1 doubles player who this week brought a legal action for negligence against the WTA after being handed a four-year ban for doping, is using lawyers from the Professional Tennis Players Association’s (PTPA) legal partner, King & Spalding.
The PTPA has already brought a legal claim against the WTA, the men’s Association of Tennis Professionals and three of the grand slams, accusing them of collaborating to reduce prize money and imposing a restrictive ranking systemin the same court where Moore has filed her claim, New York Southern District Court.
The players’ union, which was set up by Novak Djokovic six years ago but which he left last month, is also in the midst of a $1bn investment round to fund a new global tour, in another potential threat to the WTA and ATP.
PTPA sources told the Guardian that they are not paying Moore’s legal bills but are supportive of her claim, with King & Spalding understood to have been engaged on a pro bono – that is, free of charge – basis.
Moore was first suspended in June 2022 after testing positive for boldenone and nandrolone at a tournament in Bogotá. The 33-year-old has always denied doping and in December 2023 she was cleared by an independent tribunal, which found that contaminated meat was the “likely source” of the positive tests.
An appeal by the International Tennis Integrity Agency (ITIA) to the court of arbitration for sport (Cas) overturned that ruling, however. In July 2025 Cas reimposed Moore’s original four-year ban, removing the 19 months already served, in a ruling that stated she had not sufficiently proven the high levels of nandrolone in her system were accidental.
Moore is now suing the WTA for negligence, arguing that it failed to warn players about the risk of contamination from eating meat, specifically before the tournament in Bogotá. She is seeking $20m in compensation for what the claim describes as reputational and financial ruin, arguing that the WTA failed in their duty of care to protect athletes.
Moore also alleges that the authorities, specifically the ITIA, showed preferential treatment to more high-profile players such as Jannik Sinner and Iga Swiatek, who were handed bans of three months and one month respectively following contamination.
The WTA spokesperson said: “We are aware of Tara Moore’s filing in the US District Court and will respond through the appropriate legal process. The arbitration was conducted by a neutral arbitrator, and there is no basis to vacate the arbitrator’s award. We respect the judicial process and will not comment further while the matter is pending.”
The ITIA was unavailable for comment.
A union source with knowledge of the case told the Guardian: “We’re supporting Tara, as she has been treated appallingly. It appears clear there are different systems in place for different people.”
The PTPA dropped its anti-trust lawsuit against Tennis Australia last month after reaching a peace deal ahead of the Australian Open, but is still suing the other three slams and the tours.
The court documents state that Tennis Australia has agreed to cooperate with the PTPA against the other tournaments, including providing confidential financial information, in return for being removed from the claim and avoiding liability for potential damages that could reach tens of millions of pounds.