Charles Jillings, CEO of Utilico, energized by strong economic momentum across Latin America. Watch the video here.
Gene, I can assure you Novacyt's counterclaim will include everything that it possibly can. This is very much standard practice. Loss of shareholder value is not a potential head of damages but if the co. were awarded everything that it will claim then SH value will be returned (and then some), ergo it is the same thing.
It is frustrating but the process has to play itself out. Hopefully after tomorrow it will become more of a sideshow rather than the main event.
Sort of. If DHSC haven't set out their claim already they must do so within 14 days of serving their claim on Novacyt. Novacyt then acknowledge within 14 days and prepare a defence and counterclaim within 28 days or 56 days if an extension is agreed. DHSC can then do a reply. After that there maybe applications e.g. Novacyt may try and stroke out DHSCs claim if they think the whole claim or elements of it are really bobbins.
After that there is usually a 'stay', a halt in proceedings of a month or so to try and settle. You then have disclosure, the exchange of docs (say a 2 month process), followed by witness evidence of the parties (2 more months) and potentially expert evidence to say if the kit was any good.
Settlement discussions can happen at any point throughout the process.
Overall at least a year to trial if it gets that far, more likely 18 months to 2 years. Just in time for the LTIP!
All this is a court process but unless there are applications you don't properly go to a court until the trial itself.
Not imminently - by memory we at least 28 days to respond but that is often extended to 56 days. I would hope we hear further details of the counterclaim then. Often serious settlement discussions then take place as both sides realise what they are facing and will have had proper input from their legal teams.
Poidster, yes the parties have a duty to settle before issuing proceedings pursuant to the protocol and I believe there's escalation provisions in the contract. That duty remains ongoing so settlement remains a distinct possibility (indeed 90%+ cases settle before trial).
K, I think you are right. But we can't come out and say it yet. Let the QC's / lawyers prepare the Defence and Counterclaim (which will include anything possible) and then notify the market what the co. are claiming and that it remains confident etc.
thanks B2 - Courts of E&W so in theory the statements of case and certainly any decision will be made public (subject to the parties agreeing to arbitrate and thus keep matters private instead). It ought not to be hard for us to get together a counterclaim based on phase II assurances that far exceeds the value of DHSC's claim. This will add pressure on DHSC if it is out in the public and I still can't see them wanting to provide disclosure of docs, their record keeping would have been poor during these times or provide witness evidence - most would have moved on from their jobs whilst we still have GM in the background who is still a major shareholder. All in all, its fine although any settlement may be a while off so don't be banking on a short term fillip.
Does anyone know whether the Qs supplied to the Gov are the same iterations as those currently being supplied to Tata et al? If so, it kinda feels that if its good enough for you....
14 days is the minimum under the pre action protocol but in reality you give at least 28 days because a) you want to position yourself well for when costs are decided and b) you don't really want to press the button. It's obviously not good news short term and I am curious as to why we didn't issue proceedings - whilst it wouldn't change the outcome of the dispute it will have affected short term sentiment. Does anyone have a link to the contract? I can't remember whether the dispute was to be settled by arbitration or in courts of E&W - if the latter we ought to find out more about the dispute as it is a matter of public record.
B2 - the directors will have had warning with a letter before action. In theory this may have only come 14 days ago but v unlikely. It's possible that the directors did not anticipate DHSC would actually do as threatened. Good tactics by DHSC - I would be surprised if they have got the resources or appetite for litigation so this will to put them in a better negotiating position. In the mid term makes no difference to co. Prospects as we've moved on from DHSC to Tata, Amazon etc
Apparently Amazon are a strategically important client...https://www.linkedin.com/in/murali-painter-aa5ba7119
Another heavyweight joined the ranks a couple of months back. Surely these chaps are being employed for good reasons...https://www.linkedin.com/in/dr-thomas-heister-66222925
I would like to know if DA accepts that the co. have been secretive and if possible a) explain why b) commit to being more open in the future. I found it irksome that GM defended the co's position on this last time around (although to be fair we were more open under GM's tenure as we have been so far under DA's!).
As good as Larry and co. are it would be refreshing if the Company also chipped in with a bit of intel.
Finally on this for me, this is the first time I've seen a Tata post liked by so many Novacyt employees (about 8 on a quick count). It could just be an algorithm thing i.e. they are contacts with each other and therefore see the material their contacts have liked. Or it could mean that relationships are strengthening and there's more Tata talk at Novacyt base camp...
Agreed K, fairly bizarre but then that's the Nova way right!? Perhaps Novacyt are waiting until Tata agree a big order or perhaps details will finally be revealed at the end of this month. Eventually this development (and I'm sure many others) ought to reflect positively on the bottom line and our patience will ultimately be rewarded.
Pushing our Q's quite heavily now. Post below liked by quite a few of the Nova gang.
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/tatamedicalanddiagnostics_tatamd-expresspcr-activity-6915551180127404032-AQyC?utm_source=linkedin_share&utm_medium=android_app
Easyjet and co. were pushing heavily for the removal of all restrictions but it's clearly not working out so well for them...
https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/easyjet-flight-cancelled-covid-gatwick-luton-b2049588.html?amp
“We were asked to address the need for no manual handling of the pipetting process, and with CO-Prep™, by automating the pipetting, we’re creating walkaway time, freeing up the operator to do other tasks.”
I assume it was the NHS who asked Novacyt in a similar way they have asked for products before (Promate if I recall correctly). Suggests that the relationship is strong.
Thanks HP - here is the background to the dispute. Gov ordered c£100m worth of goods and then they decided to renege on the deal.
https://www.cityam.com/oxford-nanopore-contract-ends-early/