A High Court judge today queried a bill submitted by lawyers representing the Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) and its former chief executive Fred Goodwin.
Mr Justice Hildyard said a £115,000 "statement of costs" - outlined during the latest stage of litigation featuring RBS, Mr Goodwin and shareholders who have sued in a bid to recover investment losses - appeared "disproportionate".
The judge said the costs claim would need "more careful scrutiny".
Litigation centred on an RBS share offer in the summer of 2008 - a few months before the bank failed and was given emergency Government support following a global financial crisis, said the judge.
The RBS share price had "deteriorated very considerably" and scores of investors were seeking recovery of "enormous" losses on the grounds that a prospectus had not been "accurate or complete", he added. Mr Justice Hildyard said the total value of claims ran into billions of pounds.
During the latest stage of litigation, at the High Court in London, investors had asked the judge to order RBS to produce a "formal budget" providing details of money being spent on litigation. The judge had refused - saying the application was premature.
RBS, Mr Goodwin and other named defendants, had subsequently asked the judge to order investors to pay the legal costs they had run up defending that budget application - and submitted a "statement of costs" in the sum of £115, 025.
Mr Justice Hildyard ruled that investors should pay half of the RBS legal bill and said the costs run up would have to be assessed in detail.
He added, in a written ruling published today: "The statement of costs in the grand total of £115,025.04 appears disproportionate and would need the more careful scrutiny of detailed assessment."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article