23 February 2007
Further to the announcement made on 8 February 2007 which refers to the indemnity in favour of the Company and Cashbox ATM Systems Limited ("ATM"), the Company's subsidiary, at a Court hearing on 21 February 2007 concerning the ongoing litigation between, inter alia, ATM and Hanco ATM Systems Limited ("Hanco"), the Court ordered that:
Adjudication will be made regarding the remainder of the costs of the action at a later date.
ATM and Carl Thomas were refused permission to appeal against the summary judgment ruling by the Master but intend to renew their application to a High Court Judge. In the event that permission is granted and any appeal is successful then they will apply to have the above costs orders set aside.
Hanco's application for an interim payment (in relation to quantum) was adjourned to a further hearing.
ATM and Mr. Thomas's position remains that Hanco would not be entitled to anything other than nominal recovery because (i) Hanco would not have secured Phase II of the Threshers contract in any event; and (ii) Phase II of the Threshers contract was not profitable for ATM.
To e-mail this link to a friend, please complete the details below and click send.