Super shoes in elite running — World Athletics regulations & legal risks explained

The 2026 London Marathon brought ‘super shoes’ back into the spotlight, with both race winners wearing Adidas' newly launched Adizero Adios Pro Evo 3 as they recorded historic performances.

Advanced super shoes — elite running footwear using advanced foams, carbon plates and other biomechanical design features — have transformed competitive running. As technological innovation accelerates, however, so do the product safety and commercial questions that sit behind race-day footwear.

Here, Emma Howe, Georgina Rothwell and Catherine Forshaw from our specialist sports sector team explore how the rapid rise of super shoes is reshaping elite sport — not just in terms of performance but also the legal and regulatory landscape. They consider what brands, athletes and governing bodies need to think about as innovation continues to push the boundaries of what’s possible on race day.

Why super shoes are under scrutiny

Recent races have seen podiums dominated by next-generation racing shoes across several brands. The 2026 London Marathon is a clear example: World Athletics records pages show Sabastian Sawe winning in 1:59:30 (marked as a world record pending ratification) and Tigst Assefa winning in 2:15:41 (marked as a women-only world record pending ratification), with both wearing Adidas’ latest Adizero Adios Pro Evo 3 shoes during the race.

The debate has shifted from whether technology influences performance to how that influence should be regulated. That said, footwear is only part of the picture — training, athlete physiology, pacing, course profile and conditions all remain material factors.

World Athletics shoe regulations: what’s allowed?

World Athletics seeks to balance innovation with fairness, safety and accessibility through its Athletic Shoe Regulations (the Regulations) that are updated as new designs emerge. In essence, athletes competing in World Rankings Competitions (WR Competitions) may only use shoes that have been approved for the relevant event. Athletes are responsible for compliance and manufacturers for obtaining approval of their shoes — and any non‑compliance can result in disqualification or the attempt being declared invalid.

Key operational points include:

Technical & approval requirements

Limits apply to sole thickness, plates and embedded technologies, together with restrictions on prototype use. Athletes must be able to identify the brand and model that they’re wearing and should only compete in shoes that appear on the approved list for the relevant event.

Availability & development shoe controls 

New shoes must be available for purchase by any athlete at any time prior to the WR Competition in which they’re proposed to be worn at.

Compliance checks & record verification

Post-race checks may take place, particularly where records are at stake. If a shoe can’t be identified or isn’t approved, the result may be marked as uncertified, disqualified or invalidated. Where a world record is claimed, the shoe may also be collected and examined further.

Sanctions

Sanctions may extend beyond athletes to their representatives or national federations and may include regulatory action affecting manufacturers, such as the removal of shoes from the approved list.

For brands and event stakeholders, compliance must be built in from the earliest stages of design and prototyping and carried through into product launch timing, athlete communications, event operations and record-validation processes. Federations may also face sanctions and reputational harm for failing to uphold fairness and integrity if athletes compete in non‑compliant footwear.

Product liability risks when innovation outpaces oversight

The legal exposure associated with rapid technological development is illustrated by a recent lawsuit filed by American sprinter and two‑time world champion Abby Steiner. Steiner has brought a product liability claim against Puma North America, Puma SE, Puma International Trading GmbH, Puma International Sports Marketing B.V. and Mercedes-Benz Grand Prix Ltd. She alleges that various Puma shoes using carbon fibre plate and/or Nitrofoam technology were defectively designed, inadequately tested and unsafe for their intended use. Steiner is seeking damages for alleged severe and career-ending injuries. Puma has publicly denied these allegations.

This case highlights the litigation risk that can arise when technological innovation outpaces product testing, regulatory scrutiny and internal quality controls. High-performance footwear can generate parallel regulatory, product safety, contract and insurance issues all at once.

Product risk: what happens if something goes wrong?

As performance footwear pushes the limits of design, it also raises a simple question: what happens if the product itself becomes the problem?

Under UK law, brands can be exposed even if they haven’t done anything obviously ‘wrong’. A claimant doesn’t have to prove negligence in the traditional sense — they can argue that the product simply wasn’t as safe as people were entitled to expect, taking into account how it was marketed, used and understood. That puts the spotlight on how shoes are designed, tested and presented to athletes.

In practice, this means that the paper trail matters. Testing data, design decisions, athlete feedback, warnings and product changes can all become relevant if safety is challenged. If those processes aren’t robust (or can’t be evidenced), risk escalates quickly.

There’s also a broader expectation that brands actively monitor how products perform once they’re out in the world. If issues arise, the response matters just as much as the initial design. That can range from updating guidance and warnings through to — in more serious cases — withdrawing or recalling products altogether.

For high-performance footwear, safety doesn’t stop at the lab. It runs through the entire lifecycle of the shoe, from early prototypes and athlete testing right through to post-race feedback and ongoing product review.

Beyond regulation: contracts & commercial exposure

The legal risk to manufacturers isn’t limited to product liability. A lot of it sits in the commercial relationships around the shoe.

Endorsement deals, for example, aren’t just about brand visibility — they need to deal with what athletes can actually wear.

That includes questions like:

• Can an athlete compete in an unreleased or modified shoe?
• Who signs off new prototypes?
• What happens if a shoe turns out not to be compliant and a result is lost?

Those issues become very real in a world where shoe approval, availability rules and record ratification all interact.

Behind the scenes, collaboration agreements (whether with suppliers, engineers or external partners) also need to be clear on who’s responsible for what. This is particularly important around testing, data, design decisions and regulatory approval. Where multiple parties are involved in developing a product, the risk doesn’t sit neatly with one entity unless it’s been structured in that way.

For event organisers and governing bodies, the risk is more operational. It comes down to making sure that the right checks are in place before and after a race, as well as knowing how to respond if a shoe is queried or a performance is challenged.

Insurance coverage & notification

Where products, athletes and performance are closely connected, it’s worth being clear early on about what is and isn’t covered under insurance. That includes whether product liability policies extend to issues arising from high-performance testing and when incidents or complaints trigger notification obligations.

As with most things in this space, timing is key. Sorting that out early is far easier than trying to deal with it once a claim or investigation is already underway.

Practical implications for stakeholders

Given the pace of innovation, all stakeholders must adopt a proactive approach to regulatory compliance and risk management.

Manufacturers & designers

The main takeaway is that compliance needs to be part of the process from the start. The more that these questions are worked through early — from technical specs and prototype rules to launch timing and athlete use — the easier it is to avoid problems later. Good records also matter. Testing data, design changes, warnings and athlete feedback can all help to show how a shoe was developed and why key decisions were made.

Sporting bodies & federations

These also need clear processes in place before race day. That includes keeping an approvals log for elite fields, making sure that officials know how the approved-list process works and what to do if a shoe can’t be verified. Think ahead to record-breaking performances so shoe collection, chain of custody and communication with athletes and agents don’t become a scramble after the event.

Athletes & teams

Athletes shouldn’t assume that a new shoe model is automatically competition compliant. Athletes should obtain written confirmation where possible and records should be kept, including details of the model, build, any customisations and the dates on which the shoe was first used in training and competition. If a result or injury is later questioned, that evidence may matter.

What’s next for super shoes & governance?

As science and race-day footwear continue to evolve, the challenge will remain the same: how to balance innovation, safety, accessibility and sporting integrity. The organisations best placed to manage that challenge will be those that take a clear, practical approach from the outset — testing properly, keeping good records, communicating clearly and making sure that the right checks are in place as technology moves on.

Talk to us

Our experts help clients to navigate exactly these kinds of fast-moving issues. That means bringing together experience across sport, regulatory matters, commercial contracts, product risk and disputes to support brands, governing bodies, event organisers and other stakeholders as new technology reaches the market.

Whether the focus is on product development, athlete agreements, compliance processes or managing issues when something goes wrong, our role is to give practical, commercially-grounded advice that keeps pace with the realities of modern sport.

Talk to us by calling 0333 004 4488, emailing hello@brabners.com or completing our contact form.