Zaha Hadid Architects wins right to end licensing agreement on use of late founder’s name

Zaha Hadid Architects has won the right to end a licensing agreement which requires it to pay 6% of its revenues to the foundation set up by the firm’s late founder following a protracted legal battle.

The Court of Appeal has overturned a ruling by the High Court in December 2024 which dismissed the practice’s claim that the agreement with the Zaha Hadid Foundation imposed an unfair financial burden.

Justice Colin Birss ruled that the agreement, which the firm claimed was originally set up to provide Hadid with an income, could not have been intended as a perpetual arrangement.

It means the practice, which has been led by Patrik Schumacher since Zaha Hadid’s death in 2016, can now either renegotiate the agreement or change the name of the practice.

Birss acknowledged that a clause in the original 2013 agreement stated that it would “continue indefinitely”, and this could also be interpreted as meaning “perpetually”.

However, Birss concluded that a contract that was “literally intended to go on forever unless terminated by Dame Zaha or her successor” would, from either party’s point of view, “not make business sense”.

Birss said issues may arise in the future, including the potential for the Zaha Hadid Architects brand to be tarnished by structural issues in one of its schemes, which may naturally prompt a termination of the agreement.

He said: “Many things might happen or emerge over the decades or centuries following the date of the agreement which might be so detrimental to the brand as to make it seriously disadvantageous to the Company to be obliged to continue to promote the marks, for example if an iconic Zaha Hadid building was beset with structural problems. 

“Further, architectural styles change with changes in technology and taste. Can it sensibly be said that the parties intended the Company to be bound to associate itself with and to promote Dame Zaha’s architectural identity in 100 years time?”

Birss concluded that the two parties, the Zaha Hadid Foundation and Zaha Hadid Architects (ZHA), had intended the contract to “last for an indefinite period and not to be perpetual in nature from either side’s point of view”.

Between 2018 and 2024, the agreement generated £21.4 million for the foundation, which manages Hadid’s estate and legacy.

The High Court’s 2024 ruling was made partly on the grounds that the agreement had not limited ZHA’s ability to operate competitively, with Justice Adam Johnson pointing to the “considerable financial success” the firm had achieved since the agreement was signed.

Financial records presented to the court showed ZHA’s revenues had nearly doubled from 2013 to 2023, reaching £69 million in the most recent financial year.

The Court of Appeal is the final court at which the case can be heard, unless the court allows the case to progress to the Supreme Court. 

A ZHA spokesperson said: “Following a long-standing review of the trademark licence with the Zaha Hadid Foundation, the Court of Appeal has confirmed Zaha Hadid Architects’ position that the outdated 2013 licence agreement could be ended on reasonable notice.

”The practice will now engage in constructive discussions with the Foundation about an updated licence. Following many consecutive years of record growth, the business is strong, with solid governance, healthy cash reserves and a clear long-term global plan, and will continue to honour Zaha Hadid’s legacy built over decades in developing acclaimed architecture across six continents.”