Rangers football kit sales legal case ongoing amid dispute over settlement terms

A multi-million pound legal dispute revolving around Rangers football kit sales is still ongoing due to a disagreement over the terms of a previously agreed settlement.

The judge presiding over the action has urged lawyers to “give 110%” to finalising a deal in the latest hearing in proceedings brought against Rangers by a sportswear brand called Elite Sports Group Ltd.

The firm were suing the Glasgow side for £9.5m in the Court of Session – Scotland’s highest civil court.

Elite were the exclusive brand partner to Danish sportswear firm Hummel and it instructed lawyers to go to the Court of Session in Edinburgh last November.

Lawyers claimed Rangers breached a contract which allowed the firm to provide the Glasgow team with Hummel kits.

Lawyers for Elite say the breach occurred when Rangers signed a deal with Castore, a Manchester-based brand which counts tennis ace Sir Andy Murray as one of its investors.

Last week, lawyers told Lord Braid that a deal had been agreed between parties in “the last minute of stoppage time.” No sum was disclosed.

However lawyers in the matter returned to court on Thursday to tell Lord Braid that the matter hadn’t yet settled.

Elite’s lawyer David Thomson KC said the deal agreed between the firm and Rangers had to be put in writing.

He said that a draft agreement had been given to lawyers acting for Rangers but that the Glasgow club hadn’t given any instructions to their lawyers about the agreement.

The advocate acting for Rangers, Gavin MacColl KC, told the court that the draft contained things that hadn’t been agreed between parties last week.

He told Lord Braid that the proposed agreement didn’t “reflect the bargain” made between parties last week.

Lord Braid told the lawyers that they had a two-week deadline to settle the action.

He told them that the matter would call in court next Tuesday to see if matters had been resolved.

He added: “Given that the parties seem to be agreed that settlement has been agreed then it should easily be capable to get the settlement over the line in the next few days.

“I don’t know where the fault lies.

“I will continue the case until next Tuesday at 9am and expect all involved – parties and solicitors – to show 110% commitment as it were to getting this over the line by then.

“I hope we are not having the same discussion next Tuesday.”

The case which was brought by Elite arises from a separate legal dispute involving Sports Direct, which was then owned by Mike Ashley and Rangers.

Lawyers for Ashley’s firm went to the High Court in London seeking an injunction to stop the deal between Elite and Rangers from going ahead.

The deal, which was signed in October 2018, was supposed to allow Hummel to supply Rangers with kits and to sell replicas to fans.

However, Judge Lionel Persey QC found that the deal with Hummel, to be a three-year contract worth £10m, was undertaken without giving Sports Direct a chance to match it.

Judge Persey ordered that Rangers couldn’t “wear any official Rangers technical products designed by, supplied by, gifted by or manufactured by Elite or Hummel, or bearing the Hummel brand”.

Lawyers in the action told the court last Tuesday that an agreement had been reached.

At a virtual hearing this week Elite’s lawyer said that the company wanted the agreement in writing as soon as possible.

Mr Thomson added that the fact that “instructions had not yet been given by the defender” was holding up proceedings.

Mr MacColl told the court that a deal had been concluded but the draft didn’t reflect what had been agreed.

He added: “The deal has been concluded and a settlement has been agreed.

“It took until after 4pm on Friday for a draft to be produced by those who instructed Mr Thomson and it has taken those who have instructing me sometime to go back. They have gone back with comments already in relation to matters.

“They have pointed out that the draft appears to have introduced things that are not are part of the agreement between parties.

“I don’t know why that has been put into the draft – but no doubt it can simply be taken out because it doesn’t reflect the bargain.

“I am quite happy for it to be continued to whatever date suits the court.”

Lord Braid then fixed a hearing for next Tuesday.