The legal dispute over the collapse of Britain's most expensive housing project could avoid going to trial for a payment of £68.5 million in damages, the High Court was told yesterday.
The Candy brothers, the property developers, would drop their claim if paid £68.5 million in damages by their Qatari partners for pulling out of the £3 billion redevelopment of Chelsea Barracks in London, the brothers' QC said.
Lord Grabiner, QC, was seeking to have the trial of the brothers' claim expedited and brought forward to next March or April — instead of awaiting its turn in the lists, which would mean a date in 2010.
But there were other options to going ahead with the trial: "If [the other side] want shot of us, they can pay £68.5 million and we would be happy", he said.
The judge, Mr Justice Warren, replied: "But the judge would not get the building that you would like."
Advertisement
Lord Grabiner dismissed newspaper reports that he would seek to call either the Prince of Wales or the Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, as witnesses in the case.
The Candy brothers have claimed that an intervention by Prince Charles led their Qatari partners to pull out of the redevelopment.
He had written in March this year to Qatari royals complaining that the plans for steel and glass apartments at the barracks were "unsympathetic."
He then met Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa, the Emir of Qatar. A month later the planning application was withdrawn.
The Candy brothers claim breach of contract.
Advertisement
But Lord Grabiner said that the Prince was "not a party to these proceedings and there are no plans that he should become a party to these proceedings or indeed anything, so far as we are concerned."
There was no need, he added. He had the letter written by the Prince on March 1 this year; and it was not for the Prince but for Qatari Diar Real Estate Investment Company (QD) to say what impact the letter had on their behaviour and what they subsequently did, he said.
The only issue concerning the mayor, Boris Johnson, was whether he "indicated an intention to exercise his powers" to call in the planning application, Lord Grabiner said.
"We say this never happened but it will be a a key point in the trial."
He added that Mr Johnson had not given any indication of substance, such as in a letter or in an official statement, adding: "We don't think Mr Johnson or his associates would be a relevant witness in this trial."
Advertisement
"It would probably be inadmissible but it would be irrelevant."
Any casual or informal remark made by the mayor made before Westminister City Council had even reached its official view on the planning application could not amount to proper "discharge of the mayor's statutory functions" under the planning rules, he added.
Lord Grabiner said that the trial itself could be held over three days and to argue, as QD argued, that it needed two weeks was "preposterous" and a "significant over-estimate."
Judgement is expected to be given within a few days.