In September the regulator warned borrowers were being overcharged by £100m a year

In September, the regulator warned borrowers were being overcharged by £100m a year.Although more than 70 retailers offer customers store cards, the plastic is provided by a handful of lenders. The minority investors were seeking 40 per cent of the potential value of the combined business, which they said they were told was £200m-£300m The judge rejected Mr Wood’s evidence on this point.. This was dismissed on the grounds that the duo’s rejection of Sir Tom’s offer to settle “eliminated whatever prejudice there might have been”.Mr Wood’s side feels the offer was never made concrete nor was it agreed how much it was worth. The collapse of the energy trading giant Enron in December 2001 was also a major blow as it led to a decline in energy trading and to stricter credit demands from lenders.Calpine said that filing for bankruptcy protection would give it time to reorganise its finances and stabilise its business..

UBS declined to comment.Lawyers for Mr Wilkinson and Mr Wood said the petition had been brought because of an “important point of principle. We shall be considering the impact of the decision for minority shareholders generally and in the context of an appeal”.The case exposed the bitter battles between the former investors and their lavish lifestyles, Arguments were fought in boardrooms – where Mr Gorman was branded “Billy Big Bollocks” because of his high media profile, and Jonathan Elvidge, The Gadget Shop founder, a “gay Dutchman” on account of his bright attire – and bathrooms of the world’s top nightspots. The multimillionaire is reviewing his relationship with UBS, which was not implicated in the lawsuit but was dragged into the spotlight by the judgment about one of its most senior employees. This was because the judge ruled the case unnecessary since Sir Tom’s side had offered to settle with Mr Wilkinson, who brought the petition, for “everything he could have hoped to achieve if he had been successful”.Mr Wilkinson had demanded compensation commensurate with the value of a combined The Gadget Shop and Birthdays, notwithstanding the former went bust and the greetings card chain cost its investors £10m.”It’s a damning verdict, it’s what I was wishing,” Sir Tom said. Where his evidence differs from those of other witnesses, I prefer theirs”.Sir Tom’s lawyers said they would seek millions in costs on an “indemnity” basis, entitling them to up to 90 per cent of their outlay in fighting the 15-month legal case rather than the usual half. The head of proprietary trading at UBS was described as an “unreliable witness” not always “honest in everything he says”.Mr Justice Warren said Mr Wood “came across as a very hard and calculating man albeit attempting to present himself in a much softer way. The UBS banker branded “unreliable” and motivated only by “animus” yesterday in bringing a £100m lawsuit against one of Scotland’s richest men is planning to appeal after losing the high-profile case.

Jon Wood, a managing director of the Swiss bank, and Peter Wilkinson, the Freeserve designer, were accused of having an “entirely inappropriate and inadmissible attitude” towards attempting to sue fellow shareholders in the failed The Gadget Shop.
In an unequivocal verdict, Mr Justice Warren threw out the action, which hinged on whether Sir Tom Hunter and Chris Gorman, his sidekick, illegally excluded their co-investors in the gizmo retailer from a business opportunity when they acquired the rival retail chain Birthdays.Mr Wood’s evidence was torn apart in yesterday’s judgment at the High Court in London, which brought down the curtain on the year’s most colourful corporate case. Otto Bernhardt, a conservative financial expert in Angela Merkel’s government, said he expected Mr Ackermann to step down.But the Deutsche Bank board said it had no doubt he would continue his work successfully “Mr Ackermann enjoys our full support,” it said.. Mr Ackermann claimed during the trial that Germany was the only country in which executives were prosecuted for “creating wealth”.But Germany’s highest appeals court ruled yesterday that the case be reopened. Klaus Tolksdorff, the presiding judge, said: “The bonuses were nothing other than a waste of money which ran against their fiduciary duty. Punishable behaviour will not go unpunished just because some parties set themselves above the law.”The appeals court ruling sided with German public opinion and the prosecution’s argument, which claimed that Mr Ackermann and his fellow executives had failed to safeguard Mannesmann’s assets during the takeover and had in effect sold shareholders short.The ruling prompted widespread calls from politicians and shareholder protection groups for the Deutsche Bank chief’s resignation. In an initial trial last year, Mr Ackermann and five other former Mannesmann executives were acquitted of criminal action for awarding the company’s board members an unprecedented €68m in bonuses after the takeover was concluded five years ago.
The executives had maintained the payments were merely a reward for hard work in securing the takeover, which more than doubled the Mannesmann share price.