Mike Ashley, the former owner of Newcastle United, has started legal action against the club after they announced that they would no longer allow his Sports Direct empire to sell replica shirts.
Ashley ran the club for 14 years before selling it in acrimonious circumstances in 2021 to a consortium led by businesswoman Amanda Staveley and financed by Saudi oil billions.
Now, the 59-year-old entrepreneur has gone to war with the club he once owned, accusing them of unfairly excluding Sports Direct in favour of high-street competitors JD Sports for the privilege to sell Newcastle shirts next season.
This morning, Ashley, who frequently sported a replica Newcastle shirt on match days while he was in charge, initiated legal action by lodging a £1.533 million claim at the Competition Appeal Tribunal. The claim asserts that the club has abused its dominant market position by declining to provide the new Adidas kit for the 2024-25 season to Sports Direct.
According to the claim, the decision to favor rival JD Sports and limit sales exclusively to the manufacturers, club shop, and website violates the Competitions Act. Sports Direct contends that their order, consistent with last year’s, comprising 50,900 units of Newcastle merchandise, primarily the iconic black and white striped shirts, has not been inflated.
Ashley argues that the arrangement between Newcastle and the competitor store could financially impact Geordie fans due to potentially higher shirt prices. The club has until March 28 to respond, after which Sports Direct can offer a rebuttal, potentially leading to a hearing.
This lawsuit marks the latest clash between the former and current owners of Newcastle, following previous disputes over a loan agreement facilitating the takeover and the removal of Sports Direct branding from St James’ Park.
Despite occasional strained relations between Ashley and Newcastle fans during his tenure, the club’s shirts remained popular sellers at his Sports Direct outlets. The claim also seeks an injunction to prevent Newcastle from refusing to supply Sports Direct, in addition to damages, costs, and interest.
Leave a Reply