High Court hears closing McAlpine arguments

Sir Robert McAlpine could suffer if Alfred McAlpine is allowed to continue without its first name, the High Court heard yesterday (Tuesday).

In his closing argument for Sir Robert McAlpine, Roger Wyand QC said: "If we lose this action there is nothing to stop it [Alfred McAlpine] changing and doing away with the Alfred completely.

"Unless it's prevented from putting itself forward to the world as McAlpine, then we are going to suffer," he said.

He argued that the change would increase confusion. He added that Alfred McAlpine had taken its decision with its "eyes open".

He also argued that the confusion created in the market place could lead to a contract being awarded to the wrong firm and that Sir Robert could suffer from bad publicity for Alfred.

For Alfred McAlpine, Simon Thorley QC said that since 1935 the two firms had had no control over each other's activities. He insisted there was no evidence of deception by his client in the past. While he admitted there had been confusion in the past, it did not mean there would be increased confusion in the future. Additionally the two firms do now work in very different markets.

For example, he said there is no way that a tender for Arsenal's new stadium would go to Alfred McAlpine as the firm is not known for taking on such large, trophy projects.

The hearing continues today (Wednesday) when the case is expected to close with judgement being reserved.