**Baroness Mone's Firm Found in Breach of £121m Contract** A High Court judge has ruled that a company linked to Baroness Michelle Mone breached a £121 million Government contract for surgical gowns during the pandemic. The Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) had taken legal action against PPE Medpro, alleging that the firm supplied 25 million gowns that were not sterile and therefore faulty. PPE Medpro, a consortium led by Lady Mone's husband, Doug Barrowman, was awarded the contracts by the previous Conservative government after Mone recommended the company to ministers. Both Mone and Barrowman denied any wrongdoing and did not provide evidence during the trial held in June. The DHSC's legal representatives stated that their case was focused solely on compliance, not on any profits made by the company. Ahead of the ruling, PPE Medpro filed a notice to appoint an administrator. In a post on X, Baroness Mone accused the Government of scapegoating her and Barrowman, claiming that the company had offered to settle the case. She stated, "Doug and I have been deliberately scapegoated and vilified in an orchestrated campaign designed to distract from catastrophic mismanagement of PPE procurement." Mone further claimed that the Government chose to spend £5 million of taxpayers' money on litigation instead of settling the case. Court documents revealed that the gowns were delivered to the UK in 72 lots between August and October 2020, with payments totalling £121,999,219.20 made to PPE Medpro. The gowns were rejected by the DHSC in December 2020, which demanded repayment, but this has yet to occur, leaving the gowns in storage and unusable. During the trial, Paul Stanley KC, representing the DHSC, stated that 99.9999% of the gowns were required to be sterile under the contract terms, meaning only one in a million could be unusable. He argued that PPE Medpro failed to follow a validated sterilisation process and provided gowns with invalid CE markings, which indicate compliance with medical standards. Testing revealed that out of 140 gowns, 103 failed sterility tests. In response, Charles Samek KC, representing PPE Medpro, claimed that the Government had ordered an excess of gowns and was experiencing "buyer's remorse." He argued that the DHSC approved the gowns without verifying a valid CE mark and that PPE Medpro did not need to provide one at the time. Samek also noted that the gowns were stored in shipping containers for at least three months, suggesting that contamination likely occurred during transportation and handling after delivery.