The Lawyer Africa Elite 2014 features an in-depth look at 46 leading independent firms’ strategies in 15 key sub-Saharan jurisdictions, as well as the views of in-house counsel from some of Africa’s largest companies... Read more
This year, The Lawyer’s annual ranking of the largest UK law firms by turnover is available as an interactive, digital benchmarking tool. For the first time this will allow you to manipulate each data set against the metrics of your choice.
A man from Harefield, who claims a company pulled out of a deal to lend him £765,000 after he had exchanged contracts to buy property, is suing for compensation. Richard Bowden and Oakland Homes, both of Harefield, are suing Close Brothers, London. The writ claims damages for alleged breach of contract over Close Brothers' failure to provide finance to complete the purchase of property at Harefield.
Writ issued by Worsdell & Vintner, Uxbridge.
Six international banks have launched a £17m High Court claim against Leyland Daf Finance. They are suing Leyland, now in administrative receivership and liquidation, for £17,814,132 plus interest, which they claim is owing on loan agreements. In their writ the banks - Ing Bank, ABN Amro Bank, Mees Pierson, Big Bank, Societe Generale and Chase Manhattan - are suing respectively for £5,528,298, £4,630,051, £2,370,249, £791,233, £4,106,686, and £387,612.
Robert McAlpine has launched a £1.2m High Court damages claim against insurers over damaged tunnelling equipment. The company's writ claims £1,226,283 and interest from Palatine Insurance, Great Lakes Reinsurance, Employers Reinsurance International, Arig Insurance Co, AGF/NEM Insurance, Commercial Union Assurance Group, and Gan Insurance Group. It says McAlpine took out cover for equipment, including a Dorco tunnelling machine, and in 1993 the machine was damaged beyond repair. The cost of replacing it is put at £630,000. McAlpine says that when it claimed on its insurance the insurers denied liability and refused to indemnify it.
Chartered surveyors Michael J Barney and Partners, Surrey, are being sued by The Royal Bank of Scotland for damages for alleged negligence. The claim centres on the valuation of property at Ewell, which was said by the defendants to be worth £72,000 but which the bank claims was in fact worth only £35,000. As a result of the valuation the The Royal Bank of Scotland lent £68,000, secured on the property, but the borrower then defaulted on the loan. The property was finally sold for £31,000 at auction.