|MAMUT||XOSL||Data base activities||Norway||OSLO|
The Appeals Committee of the Supreme Court has unanimously denied the
appeal from 24SevenOffice over the unanimous verdict from Borgarting
Court of Appeal of December 2008 where 24SevenOffice lost on all
counts in the dispute between 24SevenOffice and Active 24.
24SevenOffice has been ordered to cover all Active 24's cost after
unanimous loss on all counts in the Oslo District Court and in
Borgarting Court of Appeal.
"We are very pleased that the case has been denied by the Supreme
Court and we will immediately claim payment of the amount on
approximately MNOK 2.4 which Active 24 has been awarded in legal
costs. We will now focus on assessment of damages in the cross action
that Active 24 has initiated and won both in the Oslo District Court
in December 2007 and Borgarting Court of Appeal," states Eilert
Hanoa, CEO of Mamut.
Mamut's wholly-owned subsidiary, Active 24, received a writ from
24SevenOffice in March 2007. Active 24 has all the time disputed that
there was any basis for termination of the cooperation agreement
between the parties and have argued that 24SevenOffice had no grounds
to claim compensation from Active 24. Active 24 instead requested a
ruling confirming that 24SevenOffice was liable for Active 24's
losses resulting from 24SevenOffice's unlawful termination of the
In order for the matter to be resolved as quickly as possible, Mamut
and Active 24 made a settlement offer to 24SevenOffice in January
2007 that reflected Active 24's view on the case. The settlement
offer entailed no payments from Active 24 or Mamut. The offer was
turned down and the case ended up in the courts. 24SevenOffice lost
the case unanimously on all counts in the Oslo District Court in
24SevenOffice appealed the unanimous decision by the Oslo District
Court and the case was brought before the Borgarting Court of
Appeal. 24SevenOffice once again unanimously lost on all counts in
the Court of Appeal and 24SevenOffice was ordered to cover Active
24's costs in connection with the disputes in the District Court and
as well as in the Court of Appeal. It was ruled by both the District
Court and the Court of Appeal that 24SevenOffice was liable for the
loss suffered by Active 24 in connection with the unlawful
termination. The amount of the loss has not been determined.
24SevenOffice appealed the unanimous verdict from the Borgarting
Court of Appeal, but the appeal was unanimously denied by the Appeals
Committee of the Supreme Court. .
Prior to the appeal to the Supreme Court, 24SevenOffice reported NOK
4 553 917.93 as its own costs, while Active 24 has reported NOK 2 355
405. In the unanimous ruling from the Borgarting Court of Appeal it
was stated that all costs, including court fees and fees for expert
lay judges, were to be paid by 24SevenOffice.
This announcement was originally distributed by Hugin. The issuer is
solely responsible for the content of this announcement.