Pascal was ahead on all three judges' scorecards, but Dawson had gained momentum in the 10th and appeared to have Pascal badly hurt in the 11th prior to the clash of heads.
Needless to say, Dawson was not pleased with the decision. He also indicated in his post-fight interview that he had a rematch clause in his contract with Pascal. The rematch clause apparently provides that Pascal can take another fight prior to taking the rematch with Dawson.
I have tackled the issue of rematch clauses before. Specifically, leading up to the Mayweather Mosley fight I addressed the issue (more specifically, whether one has been enforced) and stated then as follows:
It turns out there has been at least one such case that was right here in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. After Hasim Rahman took Lennox Lewis' belt in April 2001, he refused to honor his contractual obligation to give Lewis a rematch. Instead, Rahman was attempting to fight another fighter. In a decision in June 2001, Judge Cedarbaum enjoined Rahman from fighting for 18 months unless he fought Lewis first. In effect, instead of forcing Rahman to fight (specific performance) she enjoined (stopped him) from fighting anybody else for 18 months unless he gave Lewis the rematch first. Thought that was interesting. I haven't seen the decision, but it also seems that nothing would have precluded Lewis from also seeking monetary damages.Given that Pascal apparently gets to fight once before giving Dawson the rematch, I assume that if Pascal were to lose his next fight, Dawson could have an entirely different view about whether he will exercise his contractual right to a rematch.
Nonetheless, for now at least, it appears that we will see these two in the ring again.
Fight Lawyer
