the Supreme court has Monday acquitted six former members of the cracked Eik Bank management for a large claim for damages.
the Court finds that the members of the management not to pay compensation for the bank's losses on the two låneengagementer.
the Judgment is an amendment of the high court's judgment, in which the four were ordered to pay 28,6 million kroner plus interest, so it ran up in 42,6 million.
The four, who now gets the money back again, is former chairman of the board Peter Marner Aage Jacobsen, vice chairman of the board Henrik Ørsted and the directors Jesper Søndberg Clausen and Kim Michael Sandberg.
in Addition to the 42,6 million dollars back added interest on the amount that run up at least 3,68 million.
In the court of appeal had the Financial Stability made requirements of 250 million dollars for the losses that occurred in the bank, which sank in the gravel in 2010. In the Supreme court the claim was, however, at approximately 107 million kroner.
the high Court dismissed the other two in the case - a member of the board of directors and a member of the executive board. The bank's audit firm was also acquitted, but the part of the judgment was not appealed to the Supreme court.
In the Supreme court if the case has been about whether the six former members of the management was held liable for bank's losses on the two låneengagementer.
And that was not, is the conclusion.
one låneengagement case of the Schaumann group. It was the part, which triggered a compensation in the court of appeal, but not in the Supreme court.
Here you will find the country's top court that none of the members of the bank have acted at fault by the granting of the loan.
The second is whether the company Sydporten, which received loans for buildings. Here enshrine the Supreme court, the high court's decision that the members of the management do not have to pay compensation.
the high Court concluded that the directors Brian Toft and Jesper Clausen failed because ejendomsspekulanten Vagn William Andersen in Sydporten be able to make a series of unjustified withdrawals.
Also, was Brian Toft 'as the starting point shall be liable for compensation' for a loss, which occurred when Eik Bank came to be on a loan of 81 million instead of 27 million.
But the claim was statute-barred as it was submitted 27 days late for the court. Therefore, the Supreme court has not taken a position on whether they were at fault in the case.
It was a relieved client, and I am also extremely satisfied with the fact that in addition to it is upheld, it is a more clear acquittal of my client, says lawyer Michael Amstrup, who represents Brian Toft.
Eik Bank, which has its roots in the Faroe islands, went down in the fall of 2010, after which the Financial Stability board took control and remains.
in Addition to Financial Stability, not to get right in his claims, it is back with a bigger millionregning for the costs of the proceedings in the court.
In the court of appeal was the state company to pay the legal costs of approximately dkk 40 million.
But the Supreme court has put 2.5 million dollars to the bill from the high court, and there have been about 15 million in costs in the Supreme court, so the total land of about 57,5 million dollars.
the Case of Eik Bank is just one of several cases in which Financial Stability has brought against managers in banks, which went down during the financial crisis.