Michael Flatley to 'call his dancers' as he wins Lord of the Dance legal dispute
Michael Flatley at Belfast High Court. Picture: Liam McBurney/PA
Michael Flatley has said heâll be âcalling his dancersâ, as a legal order blocking him from engaging with the production was overturned by a court in Belfast.
At the Chancery Court in the Royal Courts of Justice on Thursday, Mr Justice Simpson discharged a temporary injunction that had been secured against the dancer and choreographer.
Switzer Consulting took legal action in a civil case against Mr Flatley for alleged breach of contract, relating to an agreement the firm says was reached to allow it to run the dance shows.
The traditional dancer and choreographer found international fame performing at Eurovision in 1994, before going on to create the stage show .
The productionâs 30th anniversary tour is due to play in Dublinâs 3Arena next week on February 5, continuing in 2026 across Europe and the US.
Speaking outside the court after the judgement on Thursday, Mr Flatley blessed himself as he said: âIâd just like to say thank God, Iâm delighted with the judgeâs decision today.
âI wonât be in the car 10 seconds and Iâll be calling all my dancers, all of the cast and crew.
âAll their families have flown in, and weâre going to lift the roof on Thursday.
âThis will be the greatest version of this show that you will ever see.
âIâm absolutely delighted.âÂ
Asked if he was back in control of the production, Mr Flatley said: âYes, 100%.âÂ
Earlier in the week Gary McHugh KC, for Switzer, had said the injunction was necessary to protect Switzerâs interests because Mr Flatleyâs financial situation would have left him unable to pay damages.
The legal dispute hinges on a terms of service agreement under which Mr Flatley transferred intellectual property rights for to Switzer and they in turn were then required to provide business management services to Flatley such as accounts and payroll.
The temporary injunction first filed by Switzer director Joe Gallagher in early January prohibited Mr Flatley from âcancelling, postponing, or in any way interferingâ with the , including forbidding him to âcontact promoters or venuesâ.
This was on the basis of breach of contract as well as âconspiracy to cause loss by unlawful meansâ.
Mr Justice Simpson said that at that time he had been shown a text message Mr Gallagher had been sent from Mr Flatleyâs agent Denis OâSullivan, saying âunderstand you have no further involvement whatsoever in anything to doâ with the .
Gary McHugh KC, representing Switzer, had said the injunction was necessary to protect Switzerâs interests because Mr Flatleyâs financial situation would have left him unable to pay damages.
The court heard a statement by Mr Flatleyâs former financial adviser, Des Walsh, who said the dancer âhas lived the lifestyle of a Monaco millionaireâ by borrowing money âas he did not even have the minimum cash required to open a residency packageâ.
His statement claimed Mr Flatleyâs âappetite for lifestyle cash was insatiableâ, and he borrowed âŹ75,000 for a birthday party and âŹ50,000 to join Monaco Yacht Club.
David Dunlop KC, representing Mr Flatley, rejected the claims that Mr Flatley âwas a man with substantial debtsâ, and that âad hominemâ attacks had been made on his character by the opposing legal team.
Mr Dunlop had told the court on Wednesday that Mr Flatley had half a million euro with a solicitor in Dublin that was available to pay to the end of the contract with Switzer.
On Thursday, Mr Justice Simpson said he was âsatisfied that damages are an adequate remedy for the plaintiff [Switzer] and that the money is available to pay for any damages sustainedâ.
Mr Flatleyâs legal team also raised the fact that Switzer had filed new accounts last weekend, updating their valuation with a primary asset being their licence agreement with Mr Flatley.
Mr Justice Simpson said: âI cannot see how accounts can be filed essentially taking the whole of contingent income and describing it as an asset worth ÂŁ2.14m [âŹ2.47m].âÂ
The judge added that over the course of proceedings âtrenchant and quite personalâ allegations were âboth made and deniedâ, but that the civil nature of the case meant it was not the place to resolve âhotly disputed issues of factâ.
Mr Flatleyâs lawyers had warned that the tour was in danger of âfalling apartâ without the creatorâs involvement, because his âartistic directionâ is a vital component.
The production is described in promotional material as âthe culmination of Flatleyâs belief that âNothing is impossible. Follow your dreamsâ.â




