Call us today0800 160 1298
 
 

Advantage Litigation

Welcome to Advantage Litigation Services. We provide affordable access to commercial litigation.

  • Home
    Home This is where you can find all the blog posts throughout the site.
  • Categories
    Categories Displays a list of categories from this blog.
  • Tags
    Tags Displays a list of tags that have been used in the blog.
  • Bloggers
    Bloggers Search for your favorite blogger from this site.
  • Team Blogs
    Team Blogs Find your favorite team blogs here.
  • Login
    Login Login form

Force India F1 team set for High Court legal dispute with administrator

Posted by on in Uncategorized
  • Font size: Larger Smaller
  • Hits: 247
  • Subscribe to this entry
  • Print

Formula One, the world’s premier motorsport championship looks likely to be plunged into a legal battle soon after a prospective buyer of the Force India F1 team considers suing administrators over “serious concerns about the conduct of the bid process.”

Russian company Uralkali, made a serious bid to buy the team after Force India fell into administration in this summer. The team had been owned by charismatic Indian entrepreneur Vijay Mallya, Dutch businessman Michiel Mol and Indian conglomerate Sahara. Mallya, who is currently the subject of extradition proceedings by the Indian Government to force his return to the UK from India, was worth an estimated $1.5 billion at his peak in 2010, but his fortunes have declined significantly since then. The Uralkali bid ultimately failed, with the administartors agreeing a sale of the mid-table team to a consortium led by Lawrence Stroll, father of Williams F1 driver Lance.

Following the adminsitrators decision, Uralkali has indicated that it has launched legal action in London's High Court. In a statement given to Autosport magazine, Uralkali cites "inadequate responses" to questions regarding their bid from the administrators, Geoff Rowley and Jason Baker of FRP Advisory LLP. Uralkali claims that the administrator has confirmed that the winning bid was "significantly inferior" to its own and Uralkali believes "the highest bid should have been determined as the winner" and that the administration process contained "misrepresentations and lack of transparency" and "failed to achieve the maximisation of sale proceeds for the benefit of creditors, shareholders and other stakeholders".

It says it made what it calls "an extremely generous offer to acquire the company's business, assets and goodwill", including a cash consideration of between £101.5million and £122million.Uralkali says its proposal and offer fell on deaf ears:

Following the submission of our proposal, the administrator refused to engage with Uralkali team, did not reply to phone calls and emails and communicated with Uralkali in a single email following close of business on August 7, 2018 that it had entered into an exclusivity arrangement with another bidder regarding a proposal to rescue the company. “Despite expiration of the deadline set by the Administrator, no rescue plan was submitted to the court for approval, which confirmed Uralkali’s view that the rescue option was not achievable in the timeline and under conditions proposed by the Administrator. Under these circumstances, it is surprising that no attempt was made by the Administrator to engage with Uralkali with respects to its bid for the assets and business of Force India.”

Replying to the news of the High Court action, administrators FRP told Autosport that all bidders for the team were treated the same. “All bidders were given equal opportunity to submit the best deal for Force India…“throughout, we (the Joint Administrators) have closely followed our statutory duties and objectives as administrators and had the advice of experienced legal counsel.”

If you are thinking about suing another company but are worried about the costs of resolving the dispute or going to court, Advantage Litigation Services can help. We have vast experience navigating the different ways of funding commercial dispute resolution and are best placed to help you identify the most appropriate funding option and litigation protection that will best benefit you and your business. Click here to contact us or call 0800 160 1298 to discuss how we can help you manage the risks and find a funding option that works for you.

 

Get in touch

  1. Your Name(*)
    Please let us know your name.
  2. Your Email(*)
    Please let us know your email address.
  3. Company Name(*)
    Please write a subject for your message.
  4. Your Phone Number
    Invalid Input
  5. Message(*)
    Please let us know your message.
  6. Anti-Spam, please enter the characters shown
    Anti-Spam, please enter the characters shown
    Invalid Input

Latest News

  • Woody Allen, a Hollywood veteran whose career encompasses acting, directing, writing and comedy, is taking legal action against internet giant Amazon after the controversial director’s latest film, ‘A Rainy Day in New York’, was shelved following the emergence of new abuse allegations. The film, a romantic comedy starring Selena Gomez and Jude Law, was finished in 2017 but the re-emergence of sex-abuse allegations in the wake of the #me too movement has resulted in Amazon being unwilling to authorise its release, apparently indefinitely. The most recent abuse claims by Allen’s daughter Dylan Farrow have been strongly denied by the ‘Annie Hall’ star. Official investigation into the claims has also resulted in a lack of evidence, and consequently no action has been taken against. Alleging that Amazon Studios has broken a four-film contract originally signed in 2016, Allen is now seeking $68m in... Read More

  • Samuel Tak Lee, the single largest shareholder of London based and FTSE 250 listed property developer Shaftesbury, is ramping up his dispute with the Shaftesbury board, making it clear his intention to vote against its directors at their forthcoming AGM. Mr Lee, who has a 26% shareholding in the successful property development company, has gone on record in indicating that he will vote against any resolutions that would result in the issue of new shares as he believes that previous fundraising has damaged shareholder value. Mr Lee, a Hong Kong billionaire property mogul and landlord now based in London, has amassed a large property empire including the 14 acre Langham Estate in London’s exclusive Fitzrovia. He has also indicated that he will also vote against the reappointment of Shaftesbury’s Chairman, CEO & CFO and oppose director pay packages. Shaftesbury, which owns large numbers... Read More

  • Having de-listed from the Australian Stock Exchange and joined AIM last month, Australian litigation funder Litigation Capital Management Limited (LCM) is a new name in the UK’s burgeoning third party litigation funding market. The move has seen LCM raise £20m from the AIM listing, resulting in a market capitalisation on admission of circa £56m. LCM’s new London office has been established based on a six-strong team from Chancery Capital, led by well-respected litigation funding expert Nick Rowles-Davies. Rowles-Davis confirmed that their focus will remain on developing direct ‘funder to client’ relationships, rather than the usual litigation funding model of only dealing via solicitors and law firms. Commenting on Litigation Futures, Rowles-Davis said: We don’t just sit there waiting for lawyers to come to us,” he said. “It puts us in different position in chain – we’re not just service providers…it leads to a... Read More