Burford Capital Share Discussion Threads

[lazg] 25/7/2023 17:44

At what time?

[xarios] 25/7/2023 15:28

How do we listen in via What's App, please?

[three black crows] 25/7/2023 15:20

Lovely, it's all coming together for Burford, we are now in harvest season, should see the share price increase significantly over the coming months

[xarios] 25/7/2023 15:14

yes BBH, should be interesting.

Final replies by 4th AUG. For the court to make the final ruling.

Prob end AUG/SEPT

Has been whispers of a settlement from MR Maril.

[three black crows] 25/7/2023 15:07

I'm reserving the Champagne for that extra day

[xarios] 25/7/2023 14:56

2-day trial. 1 additional day is reserved if required.

Chess style, with timed replies.

[syoun2] 25/7/2023 14:52

Was there a max length? From memory 5 days but can’t remember. Hopefully quick decision from judge next week but probably take a bit longer

[stentorian] 25/7/2023 13:22

Trial starts tomorrow we can listen in via Whats App:

Members of the public may also listen in using the following listen-only conference line: Dial-in: [phone], access code: 6545179.

[tomtrudgian] 24/7/2023 17:21

It is not so much the many Prussian/Germanic/Russian/Romanian etc language variations, which Google sensibly does not begin to translate, but the attitude of rural locals to what they see as New York capitalist yanks trying to change long established practices throughout mid Europe. Burford’s claim was 30m euros.

When watching TV in Sicily, films from Milan are always subtitled. Same between Spain and South America. Some US and UK businessmen have lost out thinking that their inter-communication difficulties are only that of accent.

You have to be in a country to understand and communicate.

[papy02] 24/7/2023 11:04

Tomtr, if dissatisfied with Google Translate, you could give ChatGPT a try (someone told me it’s much better for English <-> French, though I’ve yet to try it myself)

[tomtrudgian] 24/7/2023 07:57

I used to live in East Germany, and junior rural courts like Erfurt District Court fully accept capitalism. However they are still vary of the concept of rich foreign lawyers, as they see it, buying up local disputes for astronomical success fees capable of destroying the rural economy.

I have yet to read the full judgement, and wholly distrust Google East German translations. Burford are little known even in West Germany, but I anticipate a successful appeal. We must remember that litigation financed cases was rejected by all courts globally just 14 years ago.

[galatea99] 23/7/2023 20:00

Decision in a German case.

"According to a decision by the Erfurt district court, the Free State of Thuringia does not have to pay millions in damages to several sawmills that felt disadvantaged by past business practices of the state forest. A corresponding lawsuit by the sawmills - which had been organized by an international litigation financier - was dismissed by the Erfurt Regional Court in a decision announced on Friday.

The background to the legal dispute is the way in which the Thuringian forest had marketed wood for years: the state forest not only sold wood from the state forest, but also acted as a marketer for private forest owners and municipalities. At that time, this was a common wood marketing model everywhere in Germany. In the Thuringian case, six sawmills see themselves disadvantaged by this practice. They argue that the forest sold them wood at inflated prices. The litigation financier had bought up the sawmills' claim and sued the forest or the Free State of Thuringia, which owns the forest as a semi-public company. According to the court, they want around 30 million euros in damages from the state.

According to the state, the plaintiff is a specially established compensation company of the internationally active, listed financial group Burford Capital. However, from the point of view of the court, the litigation financier is not entitled to sue for the damages claimed, said the presiding judge of the competent civil chamber, Dirk Apel. The business model of the compensation company violates the so-called Legal Services Act.

The remuneration agreements that exist between the litigation funder and the sawmills are decisive for this violation. The latter would be "unreasonably disadvantaged," said Apel. This means that the litigation financier has no legitimacy to represent the sawmills. Other regional courts had also made comparable decisions in similar processes, including the Stuttgart Regional Court, whose decision is now being reviewed by the Stuttgart Higher Regional Court.

SIMILAR ARTICLES
June 21, 2023 / Yannic Walther
BVG: Water damage at Alexanderplatz is not a problem
The water damage on the U5 is unproblematic and the U2 tunnel has been stabilized
03/21/2023 / Robert D. Meyer
Bad Cop: AfD politician Torsten Czuppon sentenced to a fine
Erfurt district court confirms verdict on allegations of persecution of innocent people
March 9, 2023 / Sebastian Haak, Erfurt
Inclusion starts in the mind
A school in Erfurt shows how children and young people from different backgrounds and backgrounds learn together
In 2003, the Federal Cartel Office first objected to the marketing practice that had been in use for years. According to the Ministry of Infrastructure, since 2008 the forest has only acted as a marketer for forest owners who – as individuals – do not own more than 3,000 hectares or – as a forest association – do not own more than 8,000 hectares of forest area. Forest owners or forest owner associations that are above these thresholds must take care of marketing the wood they harvest on their land themselves.

The decision of the district court of Erfurt in the legal dispute is not conclusive either. According to Apels, the decision can be appealed to the Jena Higher Regional Court. It is considered certain that the plaintiff litigation financier will do so. The dispute is not over with the current decision.

At the opening of the process before the district court in Erfurt, the chamber had let it be known that it took a critical view of the process financier's remuneration model. At its core, it is designed to make more money when the process gets particularly expensive. At the time, a lawyer for the litigation financier argued that this remuneration model had been deliberately chosen to ensure that the company exhausted all legal avenues to really enforce the interests of the sawmills. No lawyer for the litigation financier appeared for the verdict."

(Google Translate)

[maddox] 22/7/2023 00:25

Unlike the bond holders that have merely financed Argentina - at 5% compounded - we could end up owning Argentina!

[stentorian] 21/7/2023 21:59

RIDER75, You are of course quite correct! Original post edited.

[rider75] 21/7/2023 17:55

You missed a nul with your interest calculation. Above 5 percent interest on 17bn is not close to a hundred but to a billion USD. Per year.

[tomtrudgian] 21/7/2023 17:45

Yes I saw CB said that some time ago. Not true, and not for Bogart to decide anyway. It was doubtless a ‘sop’ for Argentinian electorators’ ears. Argentinian domestic votes are key to all of this. I doubt if anything is more aggravating to them than being charged interest on interest with 100% inflation! Burford are cute negotiators and will never try to charge amounts which are either irrecoverable or unfair.

Interest, compoundable or not, is never compounded if the Capital and the Interest are both paid at the times ordered.

So, Stentorian your final paragraph’s suggestion that the interest payable in year 2, in the example given, 5.23% in addition that payable in year one. And presumably the same again in year 3. Sadly wrong. The Statutory post-judgement interest is fixed until debt payment or settlement.

If of course just one interest or capital payment is missed in year 1, Burford’s claws will be out immediately. Not only legal claws I suspect.

[375uv] 21/7/2023 17:35

FYI:

"Indeed, while Plaintiffs do not seek a rate above 8% or compound interest, Plaintiffs’ losses are higher and have been compounding for the last 11 years".

Plaintiffs' Pre-Trial Brief, July 14, 2023.

[jockthescot75] 21/7/2023 16:34

Tom - Bogart has confirmed several times that any interest will be simple rather than compounded (unfortunately!)

[tomtrudgian] 21/7/2023 15:52

A few other points, Stentorian. US judges are more political, independent and less precedent hindered than in the UK.

1/ Pre-judgement interest is the really big one as no interest has been paid some 11 years. I am told Judge Preska can decide both the % rate or rates to be applied and also how interest is compounded. If compounded daily (unlikely) like a credit card or bank loan, the same % interest rate will cost Argentina significantly more than if compounded annually.

Post-judgement interest is Statutory. Whatever the US Treasury rate is found to be will be. It will be compounded annually as you rightly say, and will also be fixed regardless of future inflation.

Post-judgement legal or collection costs are never added to the judgement without further litigation, and may be very substantial.

[extrader] 21/7/2023 13:39

The difference is that it gives BUR mote creative ways of getting a better overall settlement from Argentina, IMO.
Atb

[stentorian] 21/7/2023 13:20

Tomtrudgian,

Thanks for the post. There is an important aspect interest compounds annually.

"b) Interest shall be computed daily to the date of payment except as provided in section 2516(b) of this title and section 1304(b) of title 31, and shall be compounded annually."



Assuming your 5.23% rate. $17bn = Yr1 $889.1m year [Edited]

Plus they'll be all the solicitors', counsels' and court costs plus the embarassment of Argentina's reputation dragged through the mud all over the world.