Mike Ashley and Sports Direct fail in Court of Appeal against Newcastle United owners – Friday decision | OneFootball

Mike Ashley and Sports Direct have lost a Court of Appeal bid against the current Newcastle United owners.

This is the just the latest stage in legal action taken by the former NUFC owner against those who bought the club from him.

Mike Ashley trying to force the Newcastle United owners to keep supplying replica shirts to his shops.

This follows a decision made by the club to restrict sales, starting with the new Adidas 2024/25 replica kits, to the club shops, Adidas themselves, plus the JD Sports chain.

Mike Ashley and Sports Direct wanted an injunction to be in place by 17 May 2024 (today) at the latest to allow time for the potential delivery of the new Adidas manufactured kit before its expected launch on 7 June.

Today (17 May 2024) though, three judges at the Court of Appeal have unanimously rejected an injunction. Meaning Mike Ashley and Sports Direct won’t be stocking the 2024/25 Newcastle United home shirts when they go on sale in three weeks time (7 June 2024).

However, a court case is almost certain to go ahead, with Mike Ashley and Sports Direct bringing a legal claim against the new / current Newcastle United owners.

The retailer, run by former Newcastle owner Mike Ashley’s Frasers Group, had asked for a temporary court order forcing the club to supply it with replica kit for the 2024/25 Premier League season.

Last month, the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) unanimously rejected the company’s request, concluding that it had “no reasonable or legitimate expectation” of continued supply from outgoing manufacturer Castore.

It said a suggestion that new kit maker Adidas and the club were obliged to continue provision would be “a significant fetter on competition”.

Sports Direct then brought a bid for an interim injunction to the Court of Appeal, with its lawyers arguing the club’s deal is “an unlawful anti-competitive agreement” amid a planned full trial of the legal claim.

But in a ruling on Friday, three judges dismissed the retailer’s request.

Sir Geoffrey Vos, sitting with Sir Julian Flaux and Lady Justice Andrews, said that while the CAT was wrong to find there was no serious case to be tried, it made the right decision in not granting the injunction.

Sir Geoffrey said: “The tribunal was right to think that, though damages would not be an adequate remedy for either side, the balance of convenience favoured refusing interim relief and ordering a speedy trial.”