Eversheds Sutherland fees for advice on transfer of Carillion contracts revealed
Freedom of information request reveals fees for post-Carillion collapse work for Network Rail
July 11, 2018 at 07:17 AM
2 minute read
Evershed Sutherland was paid almost £500,000 for its work for Network Rail in the wake of the collapse of construction giant Carillion, a freedom of information (FOI) request has revealed.
The firm was brought in to advise on the transfer of Carillion contracts to Amey Rail, a deal that saved more than 600 jobs following the company's administration.
Eversheds was paid £450,550.34 for its work on the transfer of the contracts, which included the Midland Mainline Upgrade and the North West Electrification Programme, and which was carried out over just two weeks. The fees were paid for four months of advice given by the firm.
The FOI also revealed that Network Rail was advised by panel firms Dentons and Addleshaw Goddard in the light of the collapse.
Meanwhile, a separate FOI has revealed that Mayer Brown was paid £13,148.40 by the Pension Protection Fund for advice in relation to 13 pension schemes following the Carillion collapse. The trustees of 10 of the company's pension schemes appointed DWF, while the trustees of three schemes turned to Osborne Clarke.
Legal Week also revealed that Dentons took home £100,000 in fees for nine months of advice to the Cabinet Office following Carillion's administration, in the same week that a report by The National Audit Office said law firms are expected to earn a total of £20m for their work on the construction giant's insolvency.
In May, the parliamentary inquiry into the collapse accused magic circle law firms including Slaughter and May, Clifford Chance (CC) and Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer of "squeezing fee income" from the company as it collapsed through "recklessness, hubris and greed".
Separately, a letter released by the firm last month revealed that Slaughters billed Carillion a total of £8.4m for advice in the 18 months prior to its liquidation in January this year.
Eversheds declined to comment. Mayer Brown was contacted for comment.
This content has been archived.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
© 2024 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 AllHSF Hires Trio for Luxembourg Launch, Builds Private Capital Practice
To Thrive in Central and Eastern Europe, Law Firms Need to 'Know the Rules of the Game'
7 minute readWhat About the Old Partners Who Have No Interest in AI?
Netflix Offices Raided by Authorities in Paris and Amsterdam
Trending Stories
- 1Hit by Mail Truck: Man Agrees to $1.85M Settlement for Spinal Injuries
- 2Anticipating a New Era of 'Extreme Vetting,' Big Law Immigration Attys Prep for Demand Surge
- 3Deal Watch: What Dealmakers Are Thankful for in 2024
- 4'The Court Will Take Action': Judge Upbraids Combative Rudy Giuliani During Outburst at Hearing
- 5Attorney Sanctioned for Not Exercising Ordinary Care: This Week in Scott Mollen’s Realty Law Digest
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