England Darts resorts to public fundraising as ongoing legal discrimination case strains finances
WDF
England Darts has launched a public fundraising appeal, warning that mounting legal costs linked to an ongoing legal discrimination case are now placing a significant strain on the organisation’s finances and affecting its ability to support England’s international teams.
ADVERTISEMENT
In a public statement issued this week, the England Darts Organisation said it has already spent around £10,000 defending the case and could face a further bill of approximately £45,000 should the matter proceed to a full trial. The volunteer-run body says the financial burden has begun to divert resources away from its core role of supporting England representation at the international level.
England Darts receives no funding from Sport England or the National Lottery, instead relying on modest surpluses generated by domestic tournaments to fund men’s, women’s, boys’ and girls’ teams competing at World, European and British Championship events. It says the scale and duration of the legal proceedings have disrupted that model, prompting the organisation to seek help from the wider darts community.
The case centres on a discrimination claim arising from a decision taken in 2024 to refuse entry to a transgender player, Samantha Lewis, at the England Open. The dispute also involves comments made about Deta Hedman, a long-standing figure within the organisation who holds a number of official roles. The governing body says it has had no choice but to contest the claim, with the matter remaining unresolved as legal costs continue to rise.
Read also
England Darts’ position and financial warning
England Darts has stressed that the financial strain created by the case is unprecedented in its history, warning that resources normally reserved for international representation have already been diverted into legal costs. In its fundraising appeal, the organisation said that “the monies we have already had to invest, in defending our situation is the members' monies and has had a direct consequence in our ability to support the International Teams”.
The organisation says that the model has always been built around reinvesting limited tournament income directly back into England teams, rather than building significant financial reserves. It maintains that this approach is designed to ensure international representation is determined by sporting merit, stating that it “firmly believe[s] that representing England should be based on ability and merit, not financial means”.
ADVERTISEMENT
According to England Darts, the legal action arose from the decision to refuse entry to the England Open under its “Zero Tolerance” policy towards abuse of officials, including abuse via social media. It said the refusal was “solely to safeguard Deta’s reputation and to uphold our commitment to a respectful and fair sporting environment”, adding that the action “had nothing to do with Lewis’s gender identity”.
The organisation also emphasised that the individual involved had not previously competed in one of its events, stating that “this was Lewis’s first attempt to participate in an England Darts event”. It says the legal challenge that followed left it with no option but to defend its position, warning that continued proceedings now place “the future of our company at significant risk of survival” unless further funds can be raised.
The opposing claim and legal position
From the perspective of Samantha Lewis, the decision to refuse entry to the England Open amounted to unlawful discrimination. Lewis has brought a claim alleging discrimination on the grounds of gender reassignment, alongside an asserted infringement of human rights, maintaining that the exclusion was not justified by conduct considerations.
In public statements made after the incident, Lewis described the decision as discriminatory, arguing that the refusal to compete prevented participation in an England Darts event on equal terms. The claim is framed on the basis that the decision constituted less favourable treatment connected to gender reassignment, a position that is fundamentally contested by England Darts.
ADVERTISEMENT
The legal action has now been ongoing for more than a year and remains unresolved. While England Darts says it was awarded costs at an initial hearing in March 2025, the organisation also states that those costs have not been recovered and that it has been advised recovery is unlikely regardless of the eventual outcome of the case.
Publicly available information indicates that the matter is now listed for trial in 2026, with both sides continuing to dispute the basis on which the original decision was taken. England Darts maintains that its actions were grounded in the enforcement of behavioural standards, while Lewis continues to argue that the exclusion was discriminatory in nature.
Wider implications for English darts
While the Samantha Lewis case remains unresolved, it has already prompted wider questions about how prolonged legal disputes are absorbed within the amateur structures that underpin the English and WDF darts system.
Read also
ADVERTISEMENT

Kieran WoodDarts Journalist
Kieran Wood is a sports journalist based in Wales and has been active in journalism since 2022. He contributes to DartsNews.com, where he covers professional darts through news, match reports, analysis, and live coverage across the PDC calendar and major tournaments.
A key part of his work is on-site reporting from leading events. Kieran has covered the PDC World Darts Championship in person, reporting daily from the venue and providing first-hand insight from the tournament. During his coverage, he has conducted interviews with leading players including Luke Littler, Luke Humphries, and Gerwyn Price.
He is also one of the leading voices of the English-language Dartsnews Podcast, contributing regular analysis and discussion on developments across the professional darts circuit.
In his reporting, Kieran places strong emphasis on careful sourcing, editorial accuracy, and updating articles when new, verified information becomes available.
claps 0visitors 0
Just in
Popular news
Latest comments
- She is a professional. If darts is her income, she is a professional. Same as Adrian Lewis, Martin Adams. A tour card just means someone can play on the PDC tour. You could even make a case that Clayton wasn't a professional (until recently I believe) because he had employment elsewhere.BandB04-11-2026
- She's technically not a professional though as she doesn't hold a pro tour card.mr-pablo04-11-2026
- Such a shame that lakeside has been reduced to this. Fantastic venue,and previously a great tournament. Not any morerick6703-11-2026
- Seems to me that the top 16 players pick and choose whatever they want to play. Good,all the money will get spread out more. They get more money from exhibitions than tournaments so let them all withdrawrick6703-11-2026
- Play all legs and the winners split the pot. Luke gets the lot of he wins them all. If your occupation is darts player you can't enter, regardless of ability.BandB01-11-2026
- I'm quite a jaded person all things considered, but to be honest I found Beat Luke Littler to be pretty entertaining. It certainly wasn't seamless, which is to be expected given the lack of precedence, but I actually think the pacing was pretty good, the production was impressive, and there was a good sense of humour and levity to it. I think it was a very ambitious undertaking but one that, for the most part, paid off. I liked the system with the four pots and I think it added to the drama and intrigue. I enjoyed seeing the diverse range of entrants and learning about their backstories. I think the interactivity was pretty clever and well-integrated. The panel was a little incoherent at times; Lee Mack shone however, and his improvisational skills were appreciated during some more awkward interstitial moments. As far as the darts is concerned, it was a shame that the format didn't allow Littler to get into full flow. You obviously don't want him to steamroll everyone but you want to feel like you're getting the full Littler package rather than seeing him struggling to get out of first gear. I will say that his leg against Jayden Walker was very impressive, but it was mostly downhill from there. The attraction revolves around Littler being this untouchable, indomitable force, yet the format doesn't really allow him to fulfil that characterisation. As for Fallon Sherrock, she was mightily impressive and deserved the victory. It is a testament to her unshakeable character that she was able to bang in a 14-darter under such mind-bending pressure. Everything that has been said about the misleading marketing is valid, though they were clear about their eligibility criteria and were able to offload the responsibility somewhat by bringing the viewers into the decision-making process in real time. What is clear though, is that Fallon played the game according to the rules, and she should not be criticised for that, much less abused. I will admit though that it is a kick in the teeth for those true amateurs who committed time and money to the course, and I would also question those who think pub players would have no chance, given that some of Littler's winning legs were dispatched in 7 visits to the board! The great thing about darts is that it isn't so much that amateurs cannot replicate the feats of brilliance pulled off by professionals of the sport, than it is that they simply cannot replicate the consistency of their output, something that this format almost entirely removes from the equation. It should also be noted that, financially, Fallon certainly stands to benefit much less in relative terms from the paycheque than would your average pub thrower, as I'm sure she nets a fair income from the lucrative exhibition circuit alone. What I do hope is that she might use this as an opportunity to really build up a head of steam heading into the new season, as it seems long overdue that she come through Q-School and really take it to the pros on a week-in week-out basis, but whatever she chooses to do, she has certainly achieved enough already for one if not several lifetimes, so who am I to dictate terms? To conclude though, I will state once again that I found Beat Luke Littler to be a pretty enjoyable evening of entertainment. I do feel for the contestants who never actually had the chance to try their luck against the world #1, although I suppose it comes with the format, but all which inevitably raises the question: will Netflix be tempted to do it all again next year? It's hard to say. Whether it would be financially viable, I can't weigh in there. One point I have been making though, and which I touched on earlier, is that the entire concept relies on a public perception that Littler is more or less unbeatable, and that certainly hasn't been the case of late. If the execs had been trying to pitch the show in recent months while Littler has seemed vulnerable, rather than when he was mopping up almost every major title on the calendar, it would certainly be a tougher sell. We will have to see in about 6 months' time whether Littler can still reliably command perception as a near-unstoppable force in darts, and then we'll have a clearer idea about whether we should expect a second helping. Even as a one-off experiment though, and with all the controversy taken into account, I still don't think they disgraced themselves by any means, and that will probably be my lingering assessment of the event when all is said and done.Deduce635801-11-2026
- Fair play to Fallon. But...shows the mockery when a professional players wins what was meant to be an amateur v Pro event, Littlers performance was poor, and what about the players who didn't get a game? Would have been better if the pot was split amoungst all the winners and they all got a leg.BandB31-10-2026
- Not even slightly interestedrick6730-10-2026
- And yet the PDC has decided to aggravate this problem by doubling the Players Championship Finals field from 2027. I can't imagine there will be fewer withdrawals next year with even less reason to turn up. I can only hope that a whole slew of Challenge Tour top-up players receive enough prize money in the absence of much of the elite, that some of the more complacent among them struggle to scrape into even a heavily diluted field! More semi-pro players will get to test their mettle, but the standard of competition will be much inferior. It could hardly be said that the Players Championship series will provide an opportunity for darts' second string to test their Tour Card credentials anymore, but at least it will underscore the achievements of those Challenge Tour players of current and previous years, who were able to prove themselves as more than capable of competing with, and beating, the elite of the sport on a consistent basis, and reaping the due rewards.Deduce635828-10-2026
- No point in being there? Champions want to win.Deduce635828-10-2026






