[ by Melanie Gretchen ] Determining Bernie Madoff's damage could have ramifications for thousands of his victims on both sides of the Atlantic.  On Thursday, the United States Supreme Court justices will meet to discuss whether to take on the case of how victim losses in the Madoff scheme should be calculated.  Across the pond, recovering off-shore funds is another matter entirely. Stateside. A federal bankruptcy judge and a Federal Appeals Court in Manhattan have relied upon the method by Madoff bankruptcy trustee Irving Picard.  Up until now, Mr. Picard has measured losses as the difference between the cash deposited and the cash withdrawn from Madoff accounts in the years before the Ponzi scheme collapsed in December 2008.  Mr. Picard has established those out-of-pocket cash losses to total less than $20 billion. Getting A New Number. Lawyers for investors who recovered all the cash they invested with Mr. Madoff before his arrest contend that Mr. Picard should base victim claims on the final statements they received from Mr. Madoff in November 2008.  That last-statement method produces total losses topping $60 billion, Mr. Picard said. Earlier this year, in March, the SEC supported the prior rulings, when the Supreme Court asked the agency to submit a brief on the question.  Filed on 5/24/12, it said to rely on the last statements "would treat fictional profits and securities transactions — all of which were invented and many of which could not possibly have occurred at the prices Madoff claimed — as if they were real." What's Up for Grabs. Among the majority of petitions for Supreme Court review that have been denied, Mr. Picard has set aside most of the roughly $11 billion in assets that he and the government have collected, until a final "unappealable" decision has been made – subject to further delay if the Supreme Court decides to weigh in.  If the Supreme Court weighs against the trustee, the number of victims to receive their piece of $11 billion sum would increase, yet would receive far less than what they could currently get. Affecting the matter is the end of the court's current term, days after the justices meet to consider whether to hear the appeal.  If the Supreme Court opts to review the issue, a new court will be making the final call. In the U.K. Another case altogether is being considered by the Supreme Court in Britain. Although it is not a product of the Madoff fraud, the case, Rubin v. Eurofinance, might set a precedent for the trustee's effort to recover cash withdrawn from the Madoff scheme by offshore investors; to this end, Mr. Picard has hired British lawyers to represent him in the matter. Rubin v. Eurofinance. In late 2005, a cash rebate scheme operated in the U.S. for several years before ending in bankruptcy in Manhattan, sticking its 30,000 creditors with $160 million in claims against the British founders.  After the founders did not defend themselves in the American court, a bankruptcy judge ruled in July 2008 that they had defaulted in the case and held them liable for the full amount owed to their creditors. However, the $160 million amount must not have been paid, for the receivers have requested that the British courts enforce the default judgment imposed by the American court. Precedent. As per tradition, a British trial court refused to recognize the receivers’ claims as they were not based on a judgment made by a local court.  Yet, in 2010, a court of appeals reversed the trial judge, ruling that the American default judgment should be enforceable in Britain. Earlier this year, on 5/24/12, the Supreme Court in Britain, which replaced the House of Lords as the "court of last resort" in 2009, held a hearing.  Mr. Picard, among the parties given permission to intervene in the case, is represented by the London firm of Taylor Wessing. A Changing Tide. Any plaintiff trying to enforce a foreign court's bankruptcy judgment against a defendant residing in Britain will be watching the outcome of this case, according to Taylor Wessing lawyer Nick Moser.  This includes several Caribbean countries under British law – popular with the offshore hedge funds that invested in the Madoff scheme. Specifically, a win for Mr. Picard would great improve the chances of winning recent default judgments submitted to the Mr. Madoff trustee from hedge funds based in London and the Caribbean.  Mr. Picard faces 1,050 lawsuits his lawyers filed, at least 70 of which have international defendants, according to his most recent interim report to the Federal Bankruptcy Court in Manhattan.  To date, he is represented by law firms in Bermuda, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Gibraltar Luxembourg, and Switzerland. For further details, go to [Dealbook, 6/20/12], the [SEC brief], and the [Order in re The Consumers Trust].