IS Prime’s attempts to get the counterclaims presented by ThinkMarkets have been rejected by the British Court. According to the documents made available to the press, a vast majority of the counterclaims will not be struck out to further look into for the final judgment.
The legal battle between IS Prime and ThinkMarkets relates to their agreement where ThinkMarkets had agreed to offer exclusive services of executing trades for IS Prime.
One final day, IS Prime alleged that it suffered a loss of $15 million due to ThinkMarkets violating the exclusive agreement. IS Prime claimed that from September 18, 2018, to nearly January 17, 2020, ThinkMarkets used a broker or brokers to perform the legal business to be done by itself. As a result of the loss suffered, IS Prime sought to claim damages, account, and inquiry into the loss of $15 million.
ThinkMarkets review states that it is a multi-asset broker founded in 2010 as ThinkForex. The firm later rebranded itself as a part of its quick development program and demands for expansion. ThinkMarkets has its headquarters in the United Kingdom and Australia. Products offered by the multi-asset broker are Indices, Forex, Commodities, Shares, Cryptos, and Precious Metals. The aim is to attract traders of all levels with a special education package that makes the entire journey on the platform a lot smoother.
The British Court had dismissed almost the entire list of claims earlier this year before attempting to get counterclaims struck out.
One of ThinkMarkets’ counterclaims states that it had agreed to conduct trades only in Applicable Products solely with IS Prime during the Applicable Period. Click here to find out more about the platform in detail.
According to ThinkMarkets, the Qualified Exclusivity Agreement prevented it from executing deals with third parties, even if they provided a better price.
Like how IS Prime had sought damages, ThinkMarkets cited paragraph 70 to argue that they, too, were allowed to seek cancellation of trades in which IS Prime and ISFE 21 made a concealed profit.
The paragraph further explained that IS Prime and ISFE 21 were constructive trustees for purposes. Therefore, it now seeks to recover money held on trust, damages, restitution, and/or an account of profits by way of remedy.
The British Court struck out Paragraphs 66 to 70; however, Paragraph 71 has neither struck out nor passed judgment on its account.
IS Prime’s attempts to strike out the great bulk of its counterclaims were rejected, which was welcomed by ThinkMarkets. ThinkMarkets stated that it was now focused on the next stage of the proceedings.