![](/cdn/assets/images/search/clock.png)
We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Type | Share ISIN | Share Description |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Intercede Group Plc | LSE:IGP | London | Ordinary Share | GB0003287249 | ORD 1P |
Price Change | % Change | Share Price | Bid Price | Offer Price | High Price | Low Price | Open Price | Shares Traded | Last Trade | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0.50 | 0.37% | 134.50 | 133.00 | 136.00 | 134.50 | 134.00 | 134.00 | 32,465 | 11:26:08 |
Industry Sector | Turnover | Profit | EPS - Basic | PE Ratio | Market Cap |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Security Systems Service | 12.11M | 1.31M | 0.0225 | 59.56 | 78.03M |
Date | Subject | Author | Discuss |
---|---|---|---|
25/3/2010 17:02 | Great stuff, quite the best birthday present I've had today :-) | ![]() smartmoney100 | |
25/3/2010 16:34 | This is great news , it may be unclear of what extra costs have to be allowed for. But much more important to remove this uncertainty and move forward now. | ![]() interceptor2 | |
25/3/2010 16:07 | that's made my day. And Y/E at the end of next week. | ![]() rambutan2 | |
25/3/2010 14:55 | nice and clean for investors now moving forward | outsider | |
25/3/2010 14:13 | At the interim stage, the patent case had clocked up a total cost of £950k (some of that in the previous year). There doesn't seem to be any indication of how much has been incurred since then which will include a premium for underwriting the costs of European action that IGP filed. It's nice to know the issue is now closed with minimal forward costs but I would like to have been told what charge will appear in this year's accounts. | ![]() boadicea | |
25/3/2010 13:52 | At last the chains are off now. This case has been holding this one back for almost 2 years. Now that the loan note is sorted and the legal case finished, we should see the press pick up on this over the coming weeks what with an expected trading update after the 31st March as well. Its a shame that the fees have been incurred but it will give confidence in IGP that the case was settled without the long drawn out court case. Possibly ActivIdentity didnt want that either as they seem to be running out of cash. Hopefully the Trading update has a breakdown of the impact of the TWIC project since the 1.3mm cards were passed. This should have a good indication of where IGP is going in the months ahead. I can see the share price kicking on from here to the 2006 highs of 70p over the next few months as theres nothing holding it back now. | ![]() 237gmoney | |
25/3/2010 13:29 | Looking at it from an institutional point of view the settlement of the legal case will make a significant difference,over the last 12 months i have had a number of conversations with potential investors and it always dominated the discussion. | ![]() spooky | |
25/3/2010 13:11 | Settlement was always the most likely solution for IGP. The court cases would have another 12-18 months to run before final determination and the legal fees would only increase with the trials. In the UK they might have been awarded costs but that doesn't happen in the US and the only way they'd get any cash back there would be through damages if they won their counterclaims. Better to pay a minimal license fee than incur another $2mm of legal fees with no assurance of the outcome, not to mention the impact it might have on the ongoing business in the meantime. | ![]() wjccghcc | |
25/3/2010 13:11 | Finally.... | iicb | |
25/3/2010 12:48 | Great news that it's over, but I had hoped IGP would sweep the board, win costs etc. Instead IGP have to take a hit for the case costs, and a confidential "mutually acceptable" settlement can't be seen as a total victory. Nevertheless, the market will hopefully look forward and take comfort in the resolution of the case and the non-material future impact. Ta to Arthurly for the heads-up - I'd missed the RNS initially! | ![]() rivaldo | |
25/3/2010 12:34 | court case is over. | ![]() igoe104 | |
24/3/2010 23:57 | Another definition found on internet, which would imply that a previous ruling has been overturned. But not aware of any previous ruling by lower court. Vacated judgment A vacated judgment is the result of the judgment of an appellate court which overturns, reverses, or sets aside the judgment of a lower court. A trial court also has the power, under certain circumstances (usually involving fraud or lack of jurisdiction over the parties to a case) to vacate its own judgments. Relief from judgment in the United States district courts is governed by Rule 60 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. A vacated judgment makes the original judgment legally void. A vacated judgment frees the parties to re-litigate the issues subject to the vacated judgment. | ![]() interceptor2 | |
24/3/2010 23:31 | Not sure if it means vacated in the legal sense since there's been no previous judgment to vacate AFAIK. It may be that they're close to settling and so vacated the hearing. | ![]() wjccghcc | |
24/3/2010 22:35 | smartmoney, Thankyou for that. Do you think IGP now has the upper hand in the US, and if so, to what extent? This is a civil and not a criminal matter as far as I understand it - does that make any difference? | awilson | |
24/3/2010 20:40 | Specialty Definition: Vacated judgment (From Wikipedia, the free Encyclopedia) A court judgment can be upheld, vacated or reversed upon appeal. A vacated judgment is simply thrown out, allowing the parties to relitigate the issues again. Vacated judgments usually act as dismissals in American criminal law, since the United States Constitution prohibits double jeopardy. | ![]() smartmoney100 | |
24/3/2010 20:36 | CLAIM CONSTRUCTION HEARING - VACATED C08-4577 ACTIVIDENTITY CORP v INTERCEDE GROUP PLC, et al PLA: Julie M Holloway DEF: Darryl Woo Claims Construction (2 hours) VACATED? | ![]() smartmoney100 | |
23/3/2010 17:59 | I doubt share price will do anything like always. | iicb | |
23/3/2010 13:41 | RNS always seem slow to come out in these matters. sp may indicate how it went on Thursday. Fingers crossed......... | ![]() interceptor2 | |
23/3/2010 13:39 | I doubt there'll be an RNS as it's concerned with the judge ruling on definitions in the patent rather than any outcome to the case. However, the ruling will be important in determining the chance of success by either party and may lead to a settlement being more likely. | ![]() wjccghcc | |
23/3/2010 13:27 | Big day in court tomorrow. will there be an RNS out??? Or will this take a few days.... | ![]() 237gmoney | |
16/3/2010 16:08 | a potential one for us? Funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, Monday's announcement is the second installment of funds and will be divided among 16 states and qualified state designated entities (SDEs). In February, $385 million was allocated to 40 states and SDEs. The funding is part of a $2 billion effort to provide every citizen the use of an electronic medical record by 2014... | ![]() rambutan2 | |
15/3/2010 18:39 | I mopped up 10k of that 85k.... priced at 42.9. Regards, iiCB | iicb | |
14/3/2010 08:25 | US IMMIGRATION REFORM, should be good news for igp. The ID card idea is one that will help deal with concerns that were raised to prevent the introduction of previous US immigration reform measures. Senators Chuck Schumer and Lindsey Graham, who have been working on the bill, are expected to update President Obama on their progress later this week. Schumer stated that the biometric ID card deals with concerns that US immigration reform would lead to a new wave illegal immigrants working in the US. | ![]() igoe104 |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions