A company associated with Baroness Mone is required to reimburse the government with over £121 million following a violation of a Covid PPE contract. PPE Medpro, responsible for delivering 25 million surgical gowns during the pandemic, faced legal action from the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) for allegedly supplying defective goods. The High Court determined that the company breached the contract and ordered it to pay nearly £122 million within two weeks. The firm, led by businessman Doug Barrowman, the husband of Baroness Mone, secured government contracts under the previous Tory government. Baroness Mone, currently on leave from the House of Lords, endorsed the company to ministers. Both individuals have denied any wrongdoing.
Chancellor Rachel Reeves expressed the government’s intention to reclaim the funds, emphasizing that the money will be reinvested in schools, NHS, and communities. The government’s legal representatives argued that in addition to the contract costs, the DHSC should be compensated for the transportation and storage expenses, totaling over £8.6 million. Conversely, PPE Medpro’s lawyers contended that the company was unfairly targeted and accused the government of regretting the purchase, citing storage conditions as the reason for the gown defects.
PPE Medpro also claimed that the DHSC failed in its duty to guide the company on contract compliance. Prior to the ruling, the company initiated the process of appointing an administrator. Baroness Mone voiced her discontent, alleging that the DHSC declined substantial settlement offers. The court’s decision, delivered by Mrs. Justice Cockerill, confirmed the breach of contract by PPE Medpro, entitling the DHSC to compensation for the unusable gowns. The payment deadline was set for October 15.
In response, Mr. Barrowman criticized the judgement as an injustice, asserting that the trial evidence proved the gowns’ sterility. The DHSC disclosed that it disbursed over £121 million to PPE Medpro in 2020, only to reject the gowns later due to sterility issues. Legal documents highlighted Baroness Mone’s involvement in the initial contract discussions, emphasizing the focus on compliance rather than any alleged impropriety. The DHSC stressed the high percentage of non-sterile gowns and the subsequent rejection as justifying their claim for damages.
PPE Medpro’s legal representation argued that the surplus gown orders and the government’s remorse led to the contractual dispute. They suggested that external factors caused the gown contamination post-delivery. Baroness Mone criticized the DHSC’s pursuit of litigation instead of accepting settlement offers, claiming the case was a diversion from PPE procurement mismanagement issues.