Linklaters hit with $55m negligence claim
Linklaters is gearing up to defend itself in court after a $55m (£25m) negligence claim was brought by a former client in one of the largest cases against a top UK law firm in recent times. The magic circle firm is preparing for a 20-day trial in the High Court next January over claims it gave negligent advice to Baltic telecoms company Levicom.
July 03, 2008 at 01:58 AM
2 minute read
Linklaters is gearing up to defend itself in court after a $55m (£25m) negligence claim was brought by a former client in one of the largest cases against a top UK law firm in recent times.
The magic circle firm is preparing for a 20-day trial in the High Court next January over claims it gave negligent advice to Baltic telecoms company Levicom.
Linklaters was instructed to advise Levicom in 2000 over a dispute with telecoms company Tele2 AB. Levicom claims Linklaters' advice on the dispute led to an arbitration in 2004, rather than a settlement on favourable terms.
The company claims Linklaters advised it that its case had a 70% chance of success if it were to go to arbitration, but at a later date reduced that to 50%. It says that, based on Linklaters' advice, it turned down three settlement offers.
According to the claim form, which was initially filed in October 2006 but was amended in April this year, Levicom is claiming damages for 'the lost opportunity to negotiate a more advantageous settlement'. It is also seeking an uplift of at least 10%, bringing the minimum claim value to $55m (£25m).
Levicom is also demanding legal costs of £1.7m from Linklaters, which it alleges would have been avoided if an earlier settlement had been reached.
Manches litigation partner Andrew Shaw is advising Levicom, with 4 New Square's Justin Fenwick QC instructed as counsel. Linklaters has instructed Clyde & Co litigation partner Conrad Walker, with Fountain Court's Stephen Moriarty QC brought in as counsel.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllFreshfields Name Change Becomes Official as Company with Similar Name Dissolves
2 minute readLeaders at Top French Firms Anticipate Strong M&A Market in 2025 Despite Uncertainty
6 minute readEU Parliament Gives Blessing to New EU Competition Chief Ribera Rodríguez
2 minute readSimpson Thacher Becomes Second Firm to Launch in Luxembourg in 2 Days With A&O Shearman Hires
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1SDNY US Attorney Damian Williams Lands at Paul Weiss
- 2Litigators of the Week: A Knockout Blow to Latest FCC Net Neutrality Rules After ‘Loper Bright’
- 3Litigator of the Week Runners-Up and Shout-Outs
- 4Norton Rose Sues South Africa Government Over Ethnicity Score System
- 5KMPG Wants to Provide Legal Services in the US. Now All Eyes Are on Their Big Four Peers
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250