North East investment vehicle Tanfield Group has received a £3.97m settlement from its US law firm over the 2013 sale of a company in the region.
Tanfield Group is in the midst of a legal battle with an American firm over the ownership of Washington cherry picker manufacturer Snorkel. That battle led Tanfield to issue proceedings against Newcastle law firm Ward Hadaway and American lawyers Foulston Siefkin LLP, which advised it in the initial deal.
Now the firm has confimed it has settled its claim against Foulston Siefkin in relation to the UK proceedings on a no-fault basis for $4.5m, (£3.978m) including interest and costs. It said its claim against Ward Hadaway is continuing, with a three-week trial scheduled to begin on November 7.
Read more: The Inn Collection Group expands North Wales presence
The US legal battle with Snorkel’s majority owner, Xtreme, regarding its acquisition of the controlling interest, is continuing, with the jury trial currently expected to take place next summer.
In a statement, Tanfield said: “The board is pleased to announce that the company has reached an agreement to settle its claim against Foulston Siefkin, Tanfield’s US based law firm at the time of the contemplated transaction, in relation to the UK proceedings, on a no-fault basis for the sum of $4,500,000 including interest and costs (£3,978,903).
“For the avoidance of doubt, the agreed settlement should not be construed as an admission of liability or wrongdoing by Foulston Siefkin. Whilst the company is no longer pursuing its claim against Foulston Siefkin in relation to the UK proceedings, its claim against Ward Hadaway, the solicitor acting for the company at the time of the contemplated transaction, continues.
“The board continues to believe that a positive outcome to either or both proceedings is possible. So far as it is necessary, the company will continue to vigorously defend and advance its position in both proceedings, whilst continuing to seek advice.”
The stock market note to shareholders added that it is assessing the level of funds required to complete the UK and US proceedings, and that it does not believe that further loans will be necessary to ensure that the company can continue to protect its investment in Snorkel.
