Manolete Victory in Supreme Court

We are pleased to announce that Manolete has defeated Hastings Borough Council in the Supreme Court.

This is the third successive victory for Manolete on this case – having won in the Technology and Construction Court in 2012 and then in the Court of Appeal a year later.

Martin Bowdery QC of Atkin Chambers and Gaby Hardwicke, Solicitors acted for Manolete Partners.

The multi million pound claim relates to compensation under the Buildings Act 1984. The Council is now liable to pay “full compensation” as set out in the Act.

Stylus Sports Limited was forced into liquidation when Hastings Borough Council used Emergency Powers to close Hastings Pier in June 2006. No notice was given by the Council to the pier tenants and the three month closure, during the peak Summer period, destroyed Stylus’ business. Manolete purchased the claim from Stylus and has financed the large legal and expert costs to take the claim through all three trials and an Arbitration.

The case will soon resume in Arbitration, where the Arbitrator will decide Damages, Interest and Costs. At the end of that process the long suffering creditors will finally receive compensation. The Manolete purchase model no longer uses ATE (due to our 99% record of success, all adverse cost and risk  is simply assumed by Manolete and a full indemnity given to the IP and the Company) and Manolete has never used CFAs: therefore the entire gross proceeds from the claim are available for distribution to the Insolvent Estate and the Funder.

Manolete CEO, Steven Cooklin commented: “Most private companies and individuals who are the defendants of our claims, see the good sense in negotiating a sensible early commercial settlement, rather than expending large legal costs on both sides. Besides, we have only ever lost one of our 144 cases.

However, this case amply shows that we are willing and able to go through an extended and expensive legal process if and when that is what is necessary to achieve justice for the creditors”.

Link to press summary here (opens a .pdf document).

Link to UKSupremeCourt video of Supreme Court judgement here.

Link to clip of ITV News coverage here.

Read 1111 times


Small Case Court Win Highlights Manolete Value to Insolvency Community

Proving the effectiveness of the Manolete model even on small cases that go all the way to trial, we are pleased to report that a £50k case we funded for a North East based Office Holder has been won in the Central London County Court.

The case covered six Heads of Claim covering Misfeasance and Transactions at Undervalue. Interest was awarded to the Office Holder, dating back to September 2011. Almost all of our costs were recovered in the judgment. As Manolete assumes all the adverse cost risk (therefore no ATE cost to the case) and we do not use CFAs, the entire gross recovery was available for distribution, thus resulting in good recovery to the Insolvent Estate. If CFA and ATE had been used to finance the case, then the success fee and ATE premium would have had to be taken from the recovery, leaving nil recovery to the Insolvent Estate.

Phillip Gale of Enterprise Chambers represented the Office Holder in Court. Kidd Rapinet were the acting solicitors.

Manolete CEO, Steven Cooklin, commented: “It is small cases like this that highlight the intrinsic value of the Manolete model to the Insolvency and Creditor Communities. If the Office Holder had used a CFA and ATE structure to finance this small case to trial then there would simply have been no recovery to the Estate whatsoever – so the Office Holder would have not been able to cover her costs, let alone a distribution to creditors. Using the Manolete model, the entire gross recovery is available for distribution to the Estate and the Funder. The legal team has been paid in full and, due to our blanket indemnity in our Funding Agreement, there was no risk whatsoever to the Office Holder nor the Estate from the outset. The same principles apply on our larger cases and consequently drive fantastic results for creditors.

Read 941 times