A reality TV star has dragged a broker to court in regards to major redevelopment works.

The first claimant, Sugar Hut Group, which is owned by reality TV Star, Mr Michael Norcross, has recently battled in court with insurance broking partnership, A J Insurance (AJI), which covered the Group’s insurance cover in March 2009 just before the serious fire at the Sugar Hut Club in Essex in September.

The claimant claimed against the insurers and then proceeded to sue after it avoided the policy. However, the judge dismissed the claims for liability.

In relation to the previous string of cases where the claimants sued AJ, the brokerage admitted some allegations of negligence, but denied others, however it denied claims for causation and “contributory negligence”.

It was heard that before the trial, AJI “conceded liability” that it would pay an agreed 65 per cent of the losses.

The claimants claimed for the 65 per cent of property damage costs of £310,000, on top of the legal costs of the unsuccessful claim, at £573,136.88, which were agreed.

 However, the Business Interruption Losses were disputed, where it was claimed to be at £1,345,794, where AJI stated it was no higher than £385,776. Other costs and interest claims were also disputed.

Mr Norcross purchased a 49 per cent shareholding in the group in 2007, where at the time, the club has a restaurant, a bar, a VIP room, a gallery and floor area.

Since the initial investment, Mr Norcross became the sole owner the following year, where “improvements” were made to the venue.

Mr Norcross gave evidence that he was thinking about “increasing the capacity of the Club” in January before the fire, which would have been a “relatively simple task”.

After the fire, reinstatement works were carried out, which allegedly cost an estimated £1.5 million, where the changes for the capacity of the club were also conducted.

The claimants argued that the successful turnover once the club reopened supports their claim for business interruption profits between 2009 and 2010. However, it was disputed that the Club lost bigger spenders as the location became a “tourist destination” because of the reality show, The Only Way Is Essex.

The main dispute was between what the overall loss of turnover was during the period immediately after the fire until the club reopened.  The claimant’s representative Mr Brown totalled it at £2,626,769, whereas the defendant’s figure Mr Stanbury summed it up at £1,883,311.

After considering the reliabilities of the calculations the judge summarised that the lost turnover should be assessed by Mr Brown’s extrapolation exercise.

It was also concluded that the gross profits should be determined approximately between both Mr Brown’s and Mr Stanbury’s figures, where it was reached as being as 75.8 per cent.

Other costs including interest costs were also discussed.

The judge concluded that the claimants were to be awarded interest on the sums recoverable at 5 per cent pa.  This was added to other net costs specified in the judgement.