Belgian international Marouane Fellaini legal action against sportswear giant New Balance has been thrown out by High Court judge. Fellaini had complained that his “defective” football boots were too tight, damaging his feet and causing untold pain and attempted to sue the company for £2.1million for damages. Rosalina, an investment company representing the Manchester United player claimed on Fellaini's behalf that the American sportswear giants New Balance breached an agreement to make payments if he wore New Balance boots. Fellaini's lawyers claimed in court the boots were so poorly constructed, that they had to be “steamed and stretched” and the manufacturers had copied boots made by Nike they added that the boots were of a very poor quality that the logo fell off and that's why he did not wear them. Barrister Ian Mill QC, who led New Balance's legal team, had said there were no “reasonable grounds” for asserting that a contract between the two parties had been concluded. It was revealed that Fellaini signed a four-year deal worth £600,000-a-week with New Balance in 2012. Which expired in September 2016, and a new contract was never formally agreed upon. But Justice May said Rosalina's claims were "bound to fail" if it went to trial. The judge revealed that felliani contract with the sportswear giant was invalid, meaning that no contract was ever signed between the two parties and felliani did not have to be wearing them at all. While Fellaini and his representative could not prove that there was a deal in place. Related Articles Fellaini takes sportswear gaint to court over poor quality Jose Mourinho mad at Ander Herrera for his comments after United loss to Huddersfield United fans frustrated with Mourinho's negative football Manchester United choose Moyes over Guardiola Jose Mourinho: I'll become the most successful managers in the league The judge acknowledged that both sides had continued to communicate beyond this date as if a contract was in place, including repeated communications about the alleged pain his boots were causing him. But Fellaini refused in December 2016 to attend any further personal appearances until a new deal was signed was "significant". Justice May said in her ruling: “I am satisfied that the issues raised by New Balance's application are suitable for summary determination and that the claim for breach of a concluded agreement and the alternative claim for breach of a duty to negotiate in good faith are each bound to fail. “Accordingly there will be an order striking out the claim and/or for summary judgement in favour of New Balance.” A statement on behalf of Fellaini indicated that he would appeal the decision.