header-logo header-logo

02 June 2021
Issue: 7935 / Categories: Legal News , Commercial
printer mail-detail

One nil to Sports Direct

Rangers Football Club has lost the latest leg of its legal action over branded merchandise and replica kits
Rangers had appointed Elite as exclusive worldwide supplier of products and Hummel as exclusive worldwide technical brand in 2018, including the rights to manufacture and supply official and replica kits for three seasons. However, it did not give prior notice of this offer to its previous supplier SDI Retail (SDIR), part of the Sports Direct group, and did not inform SDIR that the deal had been signed, announcing it in a press release instead.

The High Court later held the Ibrox club’s contract with SDIR had been breached, and granted SDIR an injunction restraining Rangers from performing the Elite/Hummel agreement. Rangers then obtained a court declaration that the injunction did not prevent it taking steps to recover sums due it under the Elite/Hummel agreement, as the act of requiring monies to be paid did not amount to ‘assisting’ a counterparty to perform an agreement.

SDIR appealed the decision to grant this declaration.

Lords Justice Phillips and Underhill allowed the appeal, in SDIR v Rangers [2021] EWCA Civ 790 last week, Lord Justice Baker dissenting.

Delivering his judgment, Phillips LJ said: ‘Demanding payment of, and if necessary suing for, a debt is an exercise in encouraging and procuring performance of the relevant payment obligation by the debtor, either by eliciting payment or converting the obligation into a judgment…I consider that amounts to "assisting" performance within the meaning of the Injunction…Rangers entered into the Elite/Hummel agreement in flagrant breach of its obligations to SDIR under the agreement, as part of an ongoing illegitimate campaign to deprive SDIR of its contractual rights. The court will require strong reasons to permit Rangers to benefit from that wrongful act without SDIR's consent.’

Issue: 7935 / Categories: Legal News , Commercial
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll