15-Jul-11
START DATE
END DATE
12-Aug-11
Highland Crusader Fund II Ltd. v UBS (Objector)
COURT:
LAW:
JUDGE(S):
CLAIMANT'S LAWYER:
DEFENDANT'S LAWYER:
The Supreme Court of Bermuda
COMMERCIAL COURT
KAWALEY J
Mr. Rod Attride-Stirling (Attride-Stirling & Woloniecki) for Highland Crusader Fund II Ltd.
Ms. Nicole Tovey (Trott & Duncan) for UBS (Objector)
FACTS OF THE CASE:
The case involved a costs dispute following a sanction hearing for a Scheme of Arrangement related to Highland Crusader Fund II Ltd. The Petitioner sought indemnity costs, arguing that UBS (the Objector) had opposed the scheme solely for commercial advantage. The Objector contended that its opposition raised legitimate issues and that costs should not be awarded against it. The Court had to determine whether the Objector?s participation justified costs or if it should bear expenses due to its opposition.
SUMMARY:
(1) Should the Objector be liable for the Petitioner?s legal costs? (2) Was the Objector?s opposition commercially motivated or legally justified? (3) Should indemnity costs apply in Scheme of Arrangement cases?
OUTCOMES:
Petitioner awarded full standard costs; Objector?s opposition deemed commercially motivated but not unreasonable.
RULED IN FAVOUR OF:
Highland Crusader Fund II Ltd. (Plaintiff).
PLAINTIFF/CLAIMANT
DEFENDANT:
DURATION (DAYS):
ISSUES:
RELEVANCE:
RULING:
RULING TYPE:
CASES CITED:
Join our pro membership and get all the details at your finger tips
Want to see full case details, including key arguments and claims? [Join Pro Membership] to unlock exclusive insights.
Discover the legal strategies and defenses used in this case. [Join Pro Membership] for full access.
How long did this legal battle last, and what key events happened? [Join Pro Membership] to find out.
Uncover the critical legal principles debated in this case. [Join Pro Membership] for in-depth analysis.
See why this case matters in Banking, Mortgages, and Financial Services. [Join Pro Membership] to explore its impact.
Find out the final judgment and its legal implications. [Join Pro Membership] to access the ruling.
Understand how this judicial ruling sets a precedent in law. [Join Pro Membership] for expert breakdowns.
See how past legal precedents influenced this case. [Join Pro Membership] to unlock the list.
Download Case Summary:
Explore:
EPHESIANS 6:16
PT Satria Tirtatama Energindo v. East Asia Company Limited and Bali Energy Limited
2016
RE: C (VARIATION OF ACCESS ORDER)
2015
In the Matter of IPOC Capital Partners Limited and others
2007
Hindsight law can make mistakes. Consider checking original case studies
Highland Crusader Fund II Ltd. v UBS (Objector)
The case involved a costs dispute following a sanction hearing for a Scheme of Arrangement related to Highland Crusader Fund II Ltd. The Petitioner sought indemnity costs, arguing that UBS (the Objector) had opposed the scheme solely for commercial advantage. The Objector contended that its opposition raised legitimate issues and that costs should not be awarded against it. The Court had to determine whether the Objector?s participation justified costs or if it should bear expenses due to its opposition.