March 18 2013
START DATE
END DATE
April 23 2013
Acorn Services Ltd v. Kenneth F. Dill
COURT:
LAW:
JUDGE(S):
CLAIMANT'S LAWYER:
DEFENDANT'S LAWYER:
The Supreme Court of Bermuda
APPELLATE JURISDICTION COMMERCIAL LAW
Ian R.C. Kawaley CJ
Lovette Tannock (Christopher Swan & Co)
The Respondent appeared in person
FACTS OF THE CASE:
Acorn Services Ltd. claimed rental arrears and collection fees from Kenneth F. Dill. The Magistrates? Court awarded judgment in favor of the Plaintiff but did not fully grant the collection costs as claimed. The Appellant contested the partial denial of collection costs arguing it was entitled to a 33% collection fee as per common market practice not explicitly mentioned in the Lease but not disputed at trial. The Supreme Court found the collection fees were a contractual entitlement and awarded the Appellant the additional sum claimed for the collection charge.
SUMMARY:
Contractual entitlement to collection fees was contested; entitlement to collection fees as a percentage of rent due was established but not fully awarded by the lower court; appeal allowed with additional sum awarded for collection charge
OUTCOMES:
Appellant
RULED IN FAVOUR OF:
Plaintiff/Claimant
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
Acorn Services Ltd v. Kenneth F. Dill
Acorn Services Ltd. claimed rental arrears and collection fees from Kenneth F. Dill. The Magistrates? Court awarded judgment in favor of the Plaintiff but did not fully grant the collection costs as claimed. The Appellant contested the partial denial of collection costs arguing it was entitled to a 33% collection fee as per common market practice not explicitly mentioned in the Lease but not disputed at trial. The Supreme Court found the collection fees were a contractual entitlement and awarded the Appellant the additional sum claimed for the collection charge.