Blackburn Rovers sued for £500k by kit suppliers

Blackburn Rovers are being sued for at least £500,000 in damages over an alleged breach of a kit deal, High Court documents show.

The Lancashire club is facing the proceedings after negotiations for a renewal deal with its former kit suppliers broke down.

The club signed a deal with Italian company Macron in 2021 but after the five-year deal expired last month, the UK branch of the company, Macron Sportswear UK, is suing Rovers for damages over alleged breaches in the renegotiation process.

Blackburn has defended the legal action. A hearing in the claim is yet to take place.

In legal documents setting out the claim, Macron's barrister Nick De Marco KC said that the 2021 deal entitled Macron to 90 days to exclusively negotiate the deal's renewal from the start of 2025.

The barrister continued that Blackburn could negotiate with other suppliers if no agreement was reached, but had to send any third-party offer it intended to accept to Macron, which then had 10 days to submit a "matching offer".

He added that the contract stipulated that the matching offer had to include four criteria - the retainer fee, the amount of free sporting goods, royalties and bonuses, and that Blackburn was obliged to accept any such offer.

If they did not, Macron was entitled to £500,000 and "all charges and costs incurred" in claiming the sum.

De Marco said that after renewal negotiations failed, Blackburn sent a third-party offer to Macron that it planned to accept, to which the company returned a matching offer.

He continued that on June 20 2025, Blackburn informed it that it had decided to "decline Macron's proposal and enter into formal discussions with the relevant third party".

He said: "The club recognised that the Macron offer 'appeared to mirror the new offer in certain areas', but stated that other commercial terms proposed by Macron UK were unacceptable to it."

The barrister said the club had since refused to negotiate with Macron or pay the £500,000 fee as stipulated by the deal, adding this meant the supplier was entitled to that sum and interest for breach of contract.

In Blackburn's defence, Robert Anderson KC said that the club was free to accept the offer from the new supplier as Macron's deal did not "match all material terms of the third party offer conveyed to it".

Anderson said: "That offer matched only four terms of the third-party offer, and included numerous other obligations that were far more onerous for the club."

Anderson said while Macron's matching offer had to include the four criteria, it also had to "match all material terms" of any other offers received, and that the company's interpretation of the deal meant it was allowed "unilaterally to impose onerous terms" on the club.

"Macron UK's offer was not a 'matching offer'," Anderson said.

"It contained different material terms than the third-party offer and added onerous additional terms, which terms Macron UK was not entitled to impose on the club.

"Macron UK failed to match the material terms of the third-party offer, meaning an obligation to reach agreement was not triggered and the club was free to enter into a kit supply agreement with a third party."

In a reply to the defence, De Marco said that "notwithstanding its assertion that a matching offer 'had to match all material terms of the third party offer', the club has not pleaded what those 'material terms' were".

Listen to the best of BBC Radio Lancashire on Sounds and follow BBC Lancashire on Facebook, X and Instagram. You can also send story ideas via Whatsapp to 0808 100 2230.