header-logo header-logo

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

Civil way: 26 May 2017

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 claimants.

The claimant in Perry v Raleys Solicitors [2017]

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

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll