pull down to refresh

234 sats \ 6 replies \ @Wumbo 1 Aug 2022 freebie \ on: Wright v McCormack judgement bitcoin
From Conclusions Section:
149 (d) However, because he (Wright) advanced a deliberately false case and put forward deliberately false evidence until days before trial, he will recover only nominal damages.
150 Accordingly, I shall enter judgment for Dr Wright on the claim in the sum of £1
write
preview
90 sats \ 1 reply \ @rheedi0 1 Aug 2022
Slightly more than a dollar. Not bad.
reply
26 sats \ 0 replies \ @gmd 1 Aug 2022
yeah not bad at all. for some reason I thought this was going to go really badly... still what a colossal waste of money in attorney fees
reply
44 sats \ 2 replies \ @cryptocoin OP 1 Aug 2022
I'ld love to see how much they spent on attorney fees and costs related to this trial.
reply
26 sats \ 1 reply \ @Lost_dogz 2 Aug 2022
That's the next part of this case. The judge still has to decide who's going to have to pay these costs...
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @1GLENCoop 7 Jul
The High Court (in London, on Date: 5 July 2024) handed down a Worldwide freezing order against Craig Wright, in the sum of £1.548m, to support the recovery of Peter McCormack's legal fees.
See #599404.
reply
26 sats \ 0 replies \ @allark 1 Aug 2022
Ha ha ha ha ha :)
reply