The cost of the Thyssen-Bornemisza civil court case currently being heard in the Supreme Court is estimated at over $600,000 a week.

The latest figures come from legal insiders who have been trying to cost the expense of the trial which is now in its third week.

Baron Hans Heinrich Thyssen-Bornemisza is suing his eldest son Georg for control of a Bermuda-based trust fund worth around $2.7 billion.

Heini senior, 78, put his son - who is also known as Heini junior - in charge of the trust in 1983, but now wants to wrest back control. He also claims that his son owes him $232 million in arrears, with inflation and loss of value.

The baron and his son are battling out the case in public and both have the finest lawyers money can buy.

The world's media has been eagerly anticipating public mud-slinging between father and son, but so far there has been very little revealed in court.

And the cost is mounting. In June estimates for the cost of the case, before it had even come to court, rested at $15 million.

By the end of this week the trial alone, not including the year and a half of legal preambles, will have cost an estimated $1.8 million.

The case, so far, has been sitting in court number four for four days a week, between 10.30am to 4.15pm with an hour's break for lunch.

This works out as sitting for 4hrs and 45 minutes a day with a court week of 19 hours.

While both sides and the judge will argue that much of their time is spent working out of their offices, if the cost of the case is worked out in hours spent in court alone, it works out at over $31,000 an hour -or $526 a minute.

On Thursday, both sides spent the morning discussing how much time was going to be taken off. A mid-term break has been agreed, and a further two weeks of adjournment while an earlier appeal is taken in London.

Michael Crystal QC, opened the day with the question of Friday's off, stating that they would like Friday October 29 off because of lawyers taking flights back to the UK.

Legal insiders estimate cost of Thyssen trial He said to Puisne Judge Denis Mitchell: "The question now arises of what happens next Friday, ie tomorrow, and a week on Friday, which are the two Fridays with which your Lordship is concerned before the break.

"My Lord, of course, at the end of the day the question of whether your Lordship sits on a particular day must be a question for your Lordship.'' He added: "A number of members of the teams have to be in Europe and there are flight difficulties in terms of reservations next Friday, which do not exist in relation to your Lordship directing that we do not sit on Friday, but finish next Thursday, because reservations can be obtained.

"My preference - I am not putting this forward as a matter of generalisation - in relation to next Friday, ie tomorrow, and a week on Friday, is that your Lordship should not sit.'' The judge agreed to the time off. He said: " My tendency is to sit throughout the trial only on four days of the five. However, I will maintain flexibility.

For the moment I am directing only that we do not sit for the next two Fridays and the matter can then be reviewed.'' Mr. Crystal added for the record: "I do want to emphasise for those who are reading this transcript that we are not talking about days off. We are talking about days when the Court does not sit.'' A few minutes later Mr. Crystal added: "So there is no misunderstanding, the Court is not having a day off either.'' Mr. Crystal then explained to the judge that: "It has been for some time agreed between the parties that there should be a week's break, which means that your Lordship will not be sitting the week after next.'' The judge agreed to the break from November 1 for a week.

Mr. Crystal then explained that the appeal would be heard in London on the week of November 15 and asked for the week off before this. This means that the court will not sit for the first three weeks of November.

Mr. Crystal was expected to take up to six weeks for his opening arguments. He is currently on week three.

But if the case is not being heard until November 22, it could be mid-December before he is finished.

Mr. Crystal added: " My Lord, at the moment it is not really possible for me to give your Lordship a satisfactory estimate of when I am going to finish that part of the opening on the facts.'' The case continues.

BUSINESS BUC