Co-op pushes DLA aside over 'nonsensical' claim

Co-op is seeking permission to appeal after the judge refused it, stating that the suggestion that the claimant had not had a fair trial came "quite close to an impertinent allegation".

Judge Seymour slammed DLA's performance in his original judgment saying that the "action doesn't seem to have benefited from any real legal analysis" and that the claim was "bordering on the nonsensical".

Judge Seymour's criticism even extended to the "mindless and wasteful" organisation of the trial bundles.

A Co-operative Group spokesperson said: "We did not think that it was appropriate, after what the judge had to say, that we should use DLA to front the appeal."

However, the Co-op spokesperson said that DLA would be retained to assist Ashursts because of its "intimate, detailed knowledge of the case".

The time period in which Co-op could appeal has elapsed, so it has had to apply to the Court of Appeal for permission retrospectively to extend that period and to get permission to appeal.

The spokesperson refused to reveal on what grounds the company would appeal, but Mawrey has previously claimed that it would be on the grounds of judicial misconduct.

The case revolves around services Fujitsu, then ICL, supplied to the Co-op.

Baker & McKenzie's Harry Small and Henry Carr QC of 11 South Square are advising Fujitsu.