header-logo header-logo

Civil way: 26 May 2017

26 May 2017
Issue: 7747 / Categories: Features , Civil way , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Guess the interest rate; coughing gender pay; Ooops; & enforcement tort.

OF INTEREST

Generally, the Commercial Court has historically awarded pre-judgment interest at base rate plus 1%, looking at the rate at which the successful party could borrow commercially. But its guide tells us that these days, there is no presumption that this is the appropriate measure of a commercial rate of interest. In Kitcatt and others v MMS UK Holdings Ltd and another [2017] EWHC 786 (Comm) the claimants had collected a judgment for £2.6m. They ambitiously sought interest at base plus 5%, relying on Attrill v Dresdner Kleinwort Ltd [2012] EWHC 1468 (QB) where non-commercial claimants secured base plus 5% and Reinhard v Ondra LLP [2015] EWHC 2943 (Ch) in which base plus 3% was awarded. Males J gave them base plus 2%. The rates at which a commercial concern would be able to borrow were not available to the claimants as individuals. However, they were successful business people who might be able to achieve a better rate than some other individual

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

WSP Solicitors—Amie Williamson

WSP Solicitors—Amie Williamson

Gloucestershire firm boosts residential conveyancing team

mfg Solicitors—Andrew Johnson

mfg Solicitors—Andrew Johnson

Firm strengthens corporate team in Worcester with new hire

London Market FOIL—Ling Ong

London Market FOIL—Ling Ong

Weightmans partner appointed president of London Market Forum of Insurance Lawyers

NEWS
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
The long-awaited Getty Images v Stability AI judgment arrived at the end of last year—but not with the seismic impact many expected. In this week's issue of NLJ, experts from Arnold & Porter dissect a ruling that is ‘historic’ yet tightly confined
The UK Supreme Court may be deciding fewer cases, but its impact in 2025 was anything but muted. In this week's NLJ, Professor Emeritus Brice Dickson of Queen’s University Belfast reviews a year marked by historically low output, a striking rise in jointly authored judgments, and a continued decline in dissent. High-profile rulings on biological sex under the Equality Act, public access to Dartmoor, and fairness in sexual offence trials ensured the court’s voice carried far beyond the Strand
back-to-top-scroll