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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll