Could Dongpeng Terminate Its Mbappé Deal Without Compensation? Lawyers Point to Morality Clauses in Endorsement Contracts

October 27, 2026 — Chinese beverage company Dongpeng Beverage Group has announced the termination of all its commercial cooperation with French football star Kylian Mbappé, prompting questions about whether the company could end the endorsement agreement without paying compensation. Lawyers say that if the contract contains a clear morality clause or reputation-protection provision, and the relevant conduct meets the agreed conditions, the brand may have the right to terminate the agreement unilaterally. Depending on the contract and applicable law, it could also seek damages or contractual penalties from the athlete.

Dongpeng announced on October 27 that it would immediately terminate all cooperation with Mbappé, stating that it firmly opposed and would not tolerate conduct that hurt the feelings of the Chinese people. The company’s electrolyte-drink brand, Bu Shui La, also announced the termination of its cooperation with the footballer. The decision followed an online controversy in China over remarks attributed to Mbappé in an interview.

Media reports indicate that Dongpeng’s partnership with Mbappé began on April 20, 2026, meaning the cooperation had lasted approximately six months. As the controversy intensified, related promotional content was removed from the company’s and its brands’ social media accounts. However, neither the full contract value nor the specific termination and liability provisions have been disclosed publicly. It is therefore not yet possible to determine whether Dongpeng would owe compensation or could successfully pursue a claim against Mbappé.

Lawyers explain that commercial endorsement agreements involving athletes and entertainers often include morality clauses, also known as conduct, reputation or adverse-publicity clauses. These provisions are designed to protect a brand’s reputation and may specify consequences for illegal conduct, serious public controversies, behavior considered contrary to public order and good morals, or statements that cause significant reputational damage.

If an agreement clearly grants the brand a right to terminate following specified conduct, and the facts satisfy the contractual conditions, the company may be entitled to end the relationship unilaterally. In such circumstances, termination does not automatically mean that the brand must compensate the endorser. Conversely, a company that lacks a valid contractual basis, fails to meet the agreed conditions or does not follow required procedures could face a contractual dispute.

Whether a brand can seek compensation from an endorser requires a separate assessment of the contract’s liability provisions, the parties’ performance and the evidence of any losses. If the agreement provides for liquidated damages or a contractual penalty, the brand may be able to make a claim under the agreement and applicable law. Any claimed amount, however, remains subject to the validity and interpretation of the relevant terms and the facts of the case.

The controversy has highlighted the importance of risk management in celebrity endorsements. Companies can reduce uncertainty by defining behavioral standards, procedures for handling reputational crises, termination rights and liability arrangements before signing a deal. For athletes, endorsement agreements also bring responsibilities related to public image, in addition to commercial benefits.

As of October 27, Dongpeng had not publicly disclosed the relevant contractual provisions or announced a formal compensation claim against Mbappé. The suggestion that the company could terminate the deal without paying compensation is therefore a legal assessment based on common contractual practices, not a confirmed outcome in this particular case. The final position will depend on the agreement, the evidence and any subsequent legal proceedings.