Director ‘lied’ against Chantrey Vellacott in court battle

A former director knew that accountants from Chantrey Vellcott were not
responsible for the failure of his company’s bid to win a $100m (£49m) project,
a judge has ruled.

Mr Justice Rimer said that former Convergence director Alan Robinson lied in
giving evidence on behalf of his company during litigation, which collapsed in
November, against the firm. The judge ruled that Robinson should be liable to
pay the vast majority of the firm and its insurers’ £5m legal fees, on an
indemnity basis.

The judge called Robinson ‘untruthful’ in giving evidence in a case his
company brought against Chantrey Vellacott.

‘In relation to key issues in the case I found him to be an evasive and
untruthful witness,’ said the judge. ‘I find that he knew from the outset that
CV were in no way the cause of the failure of the Silk Route Project.’

An indemnity award should see the firm and its insurers recover 90% of the
case’s £5m legal fees, compared with 60% to 70% under a standard award.

‘Our insurers incurred substantial costs in defending us and the focus will
now be on extracting those costs from those responsible for pursuing the
dishonest claims against us,’ said Chantrey Vellacott partner Ralph O’Beirne.

Solicitors acting on behalf of Robinson were unable to comment as
Accountancy Age went to press.

The case centred on Convergence’s £150m claims for negligence against CV.

Convergence, a telecoms business that is now in administration, had claimed
that CV’s actions had cost the company a $100m contract known as the Silk Route

But when Convergence entered into administration its administrators were not
prepared to fund the court action.

Further reading:

Judge throws out claims against Chantrey

Related reading