2017 - that could be when the Silver Hill legal battles are finally resolved.

Civic chiefs heard that the Supreme Court is likely to be the last battleground in which the legal dispute could be settled.

Developer TH Real Estate is contesting the ruling that the city council acted unlawfully in procuring the Silver Hill scheme. It is challenging Kim Gottlieb's successful action brought last year.

The council cabinet heard that whatever happens, the loser in the hearing due in the High Court in London on May 24-25 will most likely take the case to the Supreme Court, where there is an 18-month wait. That would push the final result back to late 2017.

View all the Chronicle's Silver Hill coverage here >>

Howard Bone, chief legal officer at the city council told Cabinet: "Whatever the result it is likely to go on to the Supreme Court. it could be 18 months at the Supreme Court. It will depend on the court timetable and how important the court thinks this should be settled quickly."

Should THRE win then it argues that it will be able to resurrect its scheme that has sparked strong opposition from city residents.

A second front is about to be opened. Last month the Chronicle reported that THRE was set to challenge the council's decision to terminate the 2004 development agreement (DA).

TH Real Estate sent the council a pre-action protocol letter outlining its stance that the council decision was unlawful.

Lawyers Hogan Lovells wrote: "The council's decision to terminate the DA before the outcome of the Gottlieb Proceedings are known, is unlawful because it is unreasonable, irrational and a disproportionate interference in (our clients) enjoyment of its possessions as protected by Article 1 of the First Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights.

"Instead of waiting a matter of weeks for the outcome of the Gottlieb Appeal, the council has decided to terminate the DA now. Our client finds that decision extraordinary in light of the significant time (more than 10 years) and public monies that have been invested in the project, as well as the thousands of man hours and many millions of pounds invested by our client."

The letter blamed the delays in on the legal action by Cllr Gottlieb.

The city council responded saying it was fully entitled to terminate the DA because a "a further period of delay was unacceptable....The council was reasonably entitled to decide that it was not prepared to wait any longer and that it was time to approach the need for regeneration at Silver Hill afresh."