Discount chain B&M sued for £13.8million by provider accusing it of stopping shopping for its merchandise in revenge over failed funding bid
Discount chain B&M is being sued for £13.8 million by a former supplier which claims the retailer stopped purchasing its products in revenge for a failed investment bid.
The Skinny Food Co, which began legal action in February, is seeking the damages for alleged breaches of agreements, High Court documents show.
Lawyers for The Skinny Food Co said it was ‘de-listed’ as one of B&M’s suppliers in both 2021 and 2025, meaning that B&M either stopped buying its products or significantly reduced how much it bought.
The company continued that the 2021 de-listing followed the breakdown of an investment in the firm by the Arora family, which ran B&M at the time.
B&M, which is yet to provide a defence to the claim, has been approached for comment.
Documents claim that one of the family members, Robin Arora, made a ‘threat’ he could ‘ruin’ The Skinny Food Co.
George Spalton KC, for Skinny, said: ‘B&M’s decision to de-list Skinny was motivated at least by the breakdown of the negotiations between (Mr Arora) and Skinny in respect of the proposed investment by the Arora family in Skinny, and by (Mr Arora’s) desire to make good his threat to “ruin” Skinny.’
The barrister said that the firm supplied B&M with more than 50 products from late 2020, including spreads, sauces, ready meals and cocktails.
He continued that B&M ‘repeatedly assured’ The Skinny Food Co that it could ‘have confidence in B&M as a trading partner’, asked for ‘exclusivity in respect of certain product lines’ and ‘sought to dissuade Skinny from dealing with B&M’s competitors’.
Discount chain B&M is being sued for £13.8 million by a former supplier which claims the retailer stopped purchasing its products in revenge for a failed investment bid
The barrister said that this led The Skinny Food Co to stop ‘pursuing opportunities’ with B&M’s rival, Home Bargains, and buy machinery worth more than £235,000 solely to serve anticipated demand from B&M for its products.
In 2021, Mr Arora – a director of B&M until 2022 – told The Skinny Food Co’s directors that the family was keen to invest in the company.
It is claimed that in one message, Mr Arora said he ‘can’t guarantee continued B&M support’ if the investment did not proceed, which Mr Spalton said were ‘express threats, alternatively implicit threats’ that there would be ‘adverse commercial consequences’ for The Skinny Food Co if the investment did not go through.
Mr Arora is also claimed to have said in August 2021 that he was ‘the only person that can make or break your business’.
After negotiations broke down, the investment was called off in September 2021 by The Skinny Food Co’s directors, which led Mr Arora to treat it ‘with a degree of contempt’, Mr Spalton said.
He added that at around the same time, B&M ‘significantly reduced the volume and value’ of orders it placed with Skinny, from a value of £10.7 million in the year to August 31, 2021 to around £3.2 million the following year.
He said that B&M did not provide notice of or reasons for its 2021 decision to ‘de-list’ The Skinny Food Co, in breach of rules, and that the move was in fact ‘retaliation for the negotiations in respect of the Arora family investment having broken down’.
In March 2022, Mr Arora is also alleged to have said that ‘he was able to ruin Skinny’s business if he wanted to’, and that the company had ‘really f***** yourselves over at B&M’.
B&M stopped listing new The Skinny Food Co products from 2023, and in June 2025, gave it written notice that it would ‘de-list’ the remaining products it sold and stop placing orders in December 2025.
But Mr Spalton said that this was caused by B&M’s ‘desire to punish Skinny’ for ‘making and pursuing’ complaints about rule breaches, and that the two de-listings had caused the firm to suffer ‘loss and damage’ amounting to at least £16.85 million.
A hearing in the claim is yet to take place.
A spokesperson for B&M said: ‘While we do not comment on legal proceedings, we will defend this matter rigorously.’
