yerburgh family
spineless shareholders

On the 29 November 2024

LEEDS COUNTY COURT

Daniel Thwaites Plc versus Web4orce Ltd.

On the morning of the Trial the Defendant’s only employee acted as their 85 year old Litigant in person as the company could not afford to employ a barrister or solicitor to act for them at Court or indeed throughout the whole dispute which started back in March 2022 . The Claimants on the other hand employed a barrister, 11 solicitors and 3 paralegals at some time or other since the start of the dispute. They were a lot younger, better qualified and enjoy far superior mental capacity in comparison to the Defendant's Litigant in Person and are listed below:

(1) David Engel, Grade A Partner charged at £785.00 per hour

(2) Neil O'Sullivan, Grade C Senior London Associate charged at £550.00 per hour

(3) Gareth Jones, Grade A Legal Director charged at £510.00 per hour

(4) Steve Murphy, Grade B Managing Associate charged at £445.00 per hour

(5) Katie Derry, Grade B Managing Associate charged at £415.00 per hour

(6) Jayd Haigh, Grade C Senior Associate charged at £415.00 per hour

(7) James Damarell, Grade C Senior Associate charged at £415.00 per hour

(8) Craig Johnson, Grade C Associate charged at £370.00 per hour

(9) Emily Howard, Grade D Trainee Sopcitor charged at £200.00 per hour

(10) Max O'Casey, Grade D Trainee Sopcitor charged at £200.00 per hour

(11) Anna Gilchrist, Grade D Trainee Sopcitor charged at £200.00 per hour

(12) Imogen Speight, Grade D Paralegal charged at £180.00 per hour

(13) Isabella Horobin, Grade D Paralegal charged at £180.00 per hour

(14) Sara Bakr, Grade D Paralegal charged at £140.00 per hour

Soon after arriving at the courthouse I recognised the Barrister for the Claimants, Daniel Thwaites Plc had arrived and we exchanged greetings. A little later I was introduced to Gareth Jones who is a Partner at Addleshaw Goddard who are the lawyers representing the Claimant. After exchanging greetings Mr Jones announced that he had brought 3 extra witnesses to Court despite the fact that the Defendant had emailed him on 15 November and explained we would no longer be requiring those 3 witnesses namely, Ann Yerburgh, Caroline Cockshott and Kevin Wood to give evidence on behalf of the Defendant.

This came as a shock to the Defendant because it was so unexpected and I was caught completely off guard as we had not prepared any questions for them. I suspect this was deliberately planned by the Claimant’s lawyers to cause confusion on the morning of the trial because they had emailed the Defendant and Court on 27 November 2024 stating Ann Yerburgh would not be attending on the day because of health problems plus Caroline Cockshott and Kevin Wood would be on “standby” just in case and would be available at short notice should the need arise.

From that point on things only got worse for all concerned because the Trial itself was a complete shambles and it was directly attributable to Addleshaw Goddard. This was mainly because the Trial was only intended to last 1 day and the Judge wasn’t best pleased when 8 witnesses turned up at Court. Consequently the Trial didn’t get under way until 12.00 hours as we had lost 2 hours in negotiations trying to decide which of the witnesses would be required to give evidence.

Nevertheless it all ended up rather well for the Defendant because although the witnesses had all managed to give their evidence there was insufficient time for summing up. In which event the Judge reserved judgement and ordered that 21 days be allowed for both parties to email written submissions to the Court and that at some future date yet to be determined we would be required to attend Court to hear the judgement.

Unfortunately for the Claimant during that 21 day interval the Defendant discovered significant evidence pointing to their lawyers. Bearing in mind they are the largest commercial firm in Leeds with 570 staff someone committed an unusual act of sabotage and Addleshaw Goddard must ultimately be held to blame. Clearly, no members of staff would want the finger of suspicion pointed at them but, the fact is the Bundles of evidence delivered to the Court had been falsified to harm the Defendant and that begs the question was it the work of just one member of staff or more?

Daniel Thwaites Plc Office Markers

To examine the map in fullscreen - click on the white square icon in the top right corner of the map. In the event the red markers in the map are overlapping then click on the plus icon in the bottom right corner of the map until they are separated, click on the same markers to discover Daniel Thwaites Plc office title, address, phone number, email / url links plus an image.

yerburgh family spineless shareholders Pub Markers

To examine the map in fullscreen view - click on the white square icon in the top right corner of the map. In the event the red markers in the map are overlapping then click on the plus icon in the bottom right corner of the map until they are separated, click on the same markers to discover their Hotel / Pub title, address, phone number, email / website links plus an image.