This article is from the source 'independent' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/lord-sugar-to-sue-lawyers-over-botched-property-deal-9439979.html

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Lord Sugar to sue lawyers over 'botched property deal' You’re sued! Lord Sugar turns on his own lawyers
(about 7 hours later)
Apprentice star Lord Sugar is suing his own lawyers for at least £1.3 million after they allegedly mismanaged a property deal. Lord Alan Sugar is suing his own lawyers for at least £1.3m over an allegedly botched property deal.
A claim filed at the High Court by Lord Sugar’s Amsprop against solicitors Kingsley Napley centres on part of his property empire in New Bond Street, which the businessman planned to redevelop, the London Evening Standard reported today/ A claim filed at the High Court by Lord Sugar’s Amsprop company against solicitors Kingsley Napley centres on part of his property empire in London’s New Bond Street, which the businessman – worth an estimated £900m – planned to redevelop. Court papers claim that Lord Sugar was forced to pay out nearly £1m to Longmire, the  exclusive London jewellers,  in July last year after Kingsley Napley allegedly mishandled efforts to take possession of the whole building, 10/10A New Bond Street.
Court papers claim that Sugar was forced to pay out nearly £1 million to Longmire — the exclusive London jewellers — in July last year after Kingsley Napley allegedly mishandled efforts to take possession of the whole building, 10/10A New Bond Street. Longmire occupied 10 New Bond Street, with watchmaker Swatch in 10A. Lord Sugar’s Amsprop wanted to combine the two shop frontages and let the whole building to Swatch, and launched a claim to deny the cufflink jeweller a new lease in April 2012.
Longmire occupied 10 New Bond Street, with watchmaker Swatch in 10A. Sugar’s Amsprop wanted to combine the two shop fronts and let the whole building to Swatch, and launched a claim to deny the jeweller a new lease in April 2012. Lord Sugar’s company  preferred original redevelopment plans which would have generated higher rent, but it claims Kingsley advised it to go ahead with a less-lucrative scheme to maximise Amsprop’s chances at trial.
Sugar’s company preferred original redevelopment plans which would have generated higher rent, but it claims Kingsley advised it to go ahead with a less-lucrative scheme to maximise Amsprop’s chances at trial. Amsprop claims the solicitors failed to disclose documents on the original plans and also failed to delay its court clash with Longmire, despite Lord Sugar’s firm settling with another tenant and removing an obstacle to the original redevelopment.
Amsprop claims the solicitor failed to disclose documents on the original plans and also failed to delay its court clash with Longmire, despite Sugar’s firm settling with another tenant and removing an obstacle to the original redevelopment. A judge found Longmire was entitled to a new lease and Amsprop – after agreeing a deal with Swatch to take the whole building – was forced to settle with the jeweller and pay £970,500 to Longmire to give up its rights, the court papers say. “As a consequence of the defendent’s negligence and breaches of duty, Amsprop has suffered loss and damage,” the claim adds.
The judge found Longmire was entitled to a new lease and Amsprop  was forced to settle with the jeweller and pay £970,500 to Longmire to give up its right, the papers say. Amsprop wants £970,500 in costs over the Longmire settlement, as well as a total of £326,379 in legal settlement costs and legal fees for both sides, and interest and other costs.
“As a consequence of the defendent’s negligence and breaches of duty, Amsprop has suffered loss and damage,” the claim says. Lord Sugar – who sold a Mayfair office block last year for a £50m profit – is no stranger to legal action after winning an employment tribunal case brought by the former Apprentice winner Stella English last year.
Amsprop wants £970,500 in costs over the Longmire settlement, as well as £326,379 in  settlement costs and legal fees. Sugar declined to comment but Kingsley Napley said: “We are disappointed that this case is being progressed. We deny the claim and will vigorously contest it. The entrepreneur made his first fortune founding Amstrad, now owned by BSkyB, in 1968.
Lord Sugar declined to comment but Kingsley Napley said: “We are disappointed this case is being progressed. We deny the claim and will vigorously contest it.”