Search results
102 results ordered by
Lawyers Covered - December 2022
Welcome to the latest edition of our Lawyers Liability & Regulatory Update, in which we look back over the last month at key developments affecting lawyers and the professional risks they face.
Read moreLawyers Covered - November 2022
Welcome to the latest edition of our Lawyers Liability & Regulatory Update, in which we look back over the last month at key developments affecting lawyers and the professional risks they face.
Read moreLawyers Covered - October 2022
Welcome to the latest edition of our Lawyers Liability & Regulatory Update, in which we look back over the last month at key developments affecting lawyers and the professional risks they face.
Read moreLawyers Covered - September 2022
Welcome to the latest edition of our Lawyers Liability & Regulatory Update, in which we look back over the last month at key developments affecting lawyers and the professional risks they face.
Read moreLawyers' Risks in Acting for Corporate Clients Without Authority
The recent decision in Rushbrooke UK Ltd v 4 Designs Concept Ltd [2022] EWHC 1687 (Ch) has highlighted the dangers for lawyers in acting for corporate clients on the instructions of a director without authority of the company. Most of the authority in this area has focused on commencement of litigation but the principles apply too to transactional matters.
Read moreLawyers Covered - August 2022
Welcome to the latest edition of our Lawyers Liability & Regulatory Update, in which we look back over the last month at key developments affecting lawyers and the professional risks they face.
Read moreThe Professional Negligence Law Review, Edition 5
The Professional Negligence Law Review provides an indispensable global overview of the law and practice of professional liability and regulation. It covers the fundamental principles of professional negligence law in each jurisdiction, including obligations, fora, dispute resolution mechanisms, remedies and time bars. The authors then review factors specific to the main professions and conclude with an outline of recent developments and issues to look out for in the year ahead.
Read moreLawyers Covered - July 2022
Welcome to the latest edition of our Lawyers Liability & Regulatory Update, in which we look back over the last month at key developments affecting lawyers and the professional risks they face.
Read moreLawyers Covered - June 2022
Welcome to the latest edition of our Lawyers Liability & Regulatory Update, in which we look back over the last month at key developments affecting lawyers and the professional risks they face.
Read moreLawyers Covered - May 2022
Welcome to the latest edition of our Lawyers Liability & Regulatory Update, in which we look back over the last month at key developments affecting lawyers and the professional risks they face.
Read moreLawyers Covered - April 2022
Welcome to the latest edition of our Lawyers Liability & Regulatory Update, in which we look back over the last month at key developments affecting lawyers and the professional risks they face.
Read moreLawyers Covered - March 2022
Welcome to the latest edition of our Lawyers Liability & Regulatory Update, in which we look back over the last month at key developments affecting lawyers and the professional risks they face.
Read moreDuties of Care to Third Parties in Tax Avoidance Schemes – Disappointment for Investors in McClean as Zacaroli, J Rejects Claims
Mr Justice Zacaroli has now handed down his judgment in David McClean and others v Andrew Thornhill QC [2022] EWHC 457 (Ch) - a ~£40m claim by investors in a tax scheme against one of the leading tax barristers in the country. The judge dismissed the claim in its entirety holding, amongst other things that the barrister did not owe a duty of care to the investors.
Read moreDuties of Care to Third Parties in Tax Avoidance Schemes – Disappointment for Investors in McClean as Zacaroli, J Rejects Claims
Mr Justice Zacaroli has now handed down his judgment in David McClean and others v Andrew Thornhill QC [2022] EWHC 457 (Ch) - a ~£40m claim by investors in a tax scheme against one of the leading tax barristers in the country. The judge dismissed the claim in its entirety holding, amongst other things that the barrister did not owe a duty of care to the investors.
Read moreLawyers Covered - January 2022
Welcome to the latest edition of our Lawyers Liability & Regulatory Update, in which we look back over the last month at key developments affecting lawyers and the professional risks they face.
Read moreLawyers Covered - November 2021
Welcome to the latest edition of our Lawyers Liability & Regulatory Update, in which we look back over the last month at key developments affecting lawyers and the professional risks they face.
Read moreLawyers Covered - July 2021
Welcome to the latest edition of our Lawyers Liability & Regulatory Update, in which we look back over the last month at key developments affecting lawyers and the professional risks they face.
Read moreLawyers Covered - October 2021
Welcome to the latest edition of our Lawyers Liability & Regulatory Update, in which we look back over the last month at key developments affecting lawyers and the professional risks they face.
Read moreLawyers Covered - August 2021
Welcome to the latest edition of our Lawyers Liability & Regulatory Update, in which we look back over the last month at key developments affecting lawyers and the professional risks they face.
Read moreThe Professional Negligence Law Review, Edition 4
This fourth edition of The Professional Negligence Law Review provides an indispensable overview of the law and practice of professional liability and regulation in 15 jurisdictions. The Professional Negligence Law Review contains information that is invaluable to the large number of firms, insurers, practitioners and other stakeholders who are concerned with the liability and regulatory issues of professionals across the globe. The variation in law and practice across the different jurisdictions is very noticeable and underlines the usefulness of a guide such as this.
Read moreLawyers Covered - May 2021
Welcome to the latest edition of our Lawyers Liability & Regulatory Update, in which we look back over the last month at key developments affecting lawyers and the professional risks they face.
Read moreIt's Cocoa, Jim, but not as we know it: Court's modern interpretation of underwriters' and brokers' duties #4 - getting the witness evidence right and new rules
This is the fourth and final article in our series following the decision in ABN Amro Bank N.V. v Royal Sun Alliance Insurance plc and 13 Underwriters and Edge Brokers (London) Limited, in which RPC acted for Edge.
Read moreLawyers Covered - April 2021
Welcome to the latest edition of our Lawyers Liability & Regulatory Update, in which we look back over the last month at key developments affecting lawyers and the professional risks they face.
Read moreIt's Cocoa, Jim, but not as we know it: Court's modern interpretation of underwriters' and brokers' duties #2 – The underwriters defence
A modern show of the historic defence strategy at its worst, or should that be best? We'll let you decide.
Read moreIt's Cocoa, Jim, but not as we know it: Court's modern interpretation of underwriters' and brokers' duties #1 - An overview of the case
In this series of articles we take a look at the decision in ABN Amro Bank N.V. v Royal & Sun Alliance plc and 13 Underwriters and Edge Brokers (London) Limited. In this article we give an overview of the case. The remaining articles will focus on particular areas of the case, these will be: 1. Underwriters' duties 2. Brokers' duties 3.Witness evidence
Read moreLawyers Covered - March 2021
Welcome to the latest edition of our Lawyers Liability & Regulatory Update, in which we look back over the last month at key developments affecting lawyers and the professional risks they face.
Read moreCourt of Appeal orders solicitor be struck off for serious breaches of accounts rules
In an important judgment in Law Society of Hong Kong v A Solicitor, the Court of Appeal set aside an order that a solicitor be suspended from practice for 24 months and substituted it with an order that he be struck off from the roll of solicitors.
Read moreHong Kong – At a glance: major changes to cross-border enforcement of judgments in Hong Kong and mainland China
The highly anticipated Mainland Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (Reciprocal Enforcement) Ordinance (the Ordinance) is set to take effect in mid-2023. Once the Ordinance is in place, applicants will be able to enforce a broader range of mainland judgments in Hong Kong by way of a registration procedure and vice versa in relation to Hong Kong judgments in mainland China.
Read moreBanking and financial litigation markets update - Summer 2022
In this overview we look at some of the most important judgments in recent months in the area of banking and financial markets litigation.
Read moreDisputes Yearbook 2022: Retail and Restructuring
As part of the acclaimed Disputes Yearbook, Legal Business interviewed members of our disputes team exploring the litigation landscape and what RPC brings to the table.
Read moreDisputes Yearbook 2022: Civil Fraud
As part of the acclaimed Disputes Yearbook, Legal Business interviewed members of our disputes team exploring the litigation landscape and what RPC brings to the table.
Read moreDisputes Yearbook 2022: Banking Litigation
As part of the acclaimed Disputes Yearbook, Legal Business interviewed members of our disputes team exploring the litigation landscape and what RPC brings to the table.
Read moreDisputes Yearbook 2022: Technology disputes
As part of the acclaimed Disputes Yearbook, Legal Business interviewed members of our disputes team exploring the litigation landscape and what RPC brings to the table.
Read moreHigh Court reviews permission for expert reports and delay after general adjourned period
In Redland Precast Concrete Products (China) Ltd v AES Steel Mould (Hong Kong) Ltd1 the Court of Appeal emphasised that it is unlikely to interfere with the exercise of a first instance court’s case management discretion regarding directions for expert reports, unless an applicant can show that the lower court’s decision is plainly wrong. This presents a party seeking to challenge such directions with a high threshold to overcome in order to obtain permission to appeal. In this case, the applicant (the plaintiff) was unable to meet the threshold – therefore, its application for permission to appeal was refused by the court. Had the plaintiff acted more expeditiously, immediately after the general adjourned period (when the courts were generally closed between January and May 2020 because of the pandemic), things may have turned out differently.
Read moreDisputes Yearbook 2021: Civil Fraud
As part of the acclaimed Disputes Yearbook, Legal Business interviewed members of our disputes team exploring the litigation landscape and what RPC brings to the table.
Read moreDisputes Yearbook 2021: Financial disputes
As part of the acclaimed Disputes Yearbook, Legal Business interviewed members of our disputes team exploring the litigation landscape and what RPC brings to the table.
Read moreCourt reviews witness’s reluctance to travel to Hong Kong because of COVID-19
In Standard Chartered Bank (Hong Kong) Ltd v Nie, the Court of Appeal refused the defendant (who resides outside Hong Kong) permission to appeal a trial judge’s decision not to allow her to give evidence by videoconferencing facilities (VCF) at trial. Apparently, the defendant had been reluctant to travel to Hong Kong from Beijing (where she resides) to attend the trial because of concerns about the COVID-19 public health pandemic. Both the trial judge and the Court of Appeal appear to have been unimpressed by the defendant’s application. Giving witness evidence by VCF during a trial in civil proceedings is not the norm (even during a pandemic). A party looking to rely on such evidence needs to act promptly to obtain the court’s permission and provide good reasons for doing so supported by credible evidence.
Read moreExamining the time bar for causes of action for the tort of negligent misrepresentation
Section 24A of Singapore’s Limitation Act (Cap. 163) provides, amongst other things, that the limitation period for any cause of action for damages for negligent misrepresentation accrues upon proof of damage in reliance of the negligent misrepresentation.
Read moreArbitrable disputes in the context of winding up proceedings
This note discusses two recent decisions of the Court of Appeal of Singapore that dealt with the standard of review to be applied in winding up proceedings where a debtor asserts that there is a dispute which parties agreed to resolve by way of arbitration.
Read moreA Review in Confidence: Modernising the Law of Breach of Confidence in Singapore
The elements for a claim for breach of confidence were trite, having been established more than 50 years ago in the English case of Coco v. AN Clark (Engineers) Ltd (1) and affirmed in numerous Singapore decisions (2) .
Read moreHong Kong Courts – In with the old and the new technology
In Re Cyberworks Audio Video Technology Ltd,(1) the High Court of Hong Kong decided that it can, as part of its case management powers and of its own volition, order that a directions hearing take place by means of a telephone conference without the physical presence in court of the parties or their legal representatives.
Read moreHong Kong courts begin use of video conferencing
Given the extended general adjourned period (GAP), during which the courts in Hong Kong have been closed except for urgent and essential court business, the judiciary has adopted an incremental approach to the use of technology for remote hearings.
Read moreHong Kong Court of Appeal hears appeal using video conferencing
On 2 April 2020 the Chief Judge of the High Court issued a Guidance Note setting out the practice for remote hearings in the Court of First Instance of the High Court (but not the District Court) using the court's existing video conferencing facilities (VCF). Hard on its heels, on 6 April 2020 the Court of Appeal conducted a hearing by VCF in CSFK v. HWH [2020] HKCA 207.
Read moreJudicial developments in recent treaty cases
A spate of recent cases concerning the application of double tax treaties has seen the courts and tribunals striving for common¬sense, policy-driven outcomes.
Read moreJudicial review: does the Court of Appeal’s decision in Murphy offer taxpayers a glimmer of hope?
Judicial review provides a constitutionally important judicial check on the exercise of statutory powers by public bodies such as HMRC. However, the wide margin of appreciation afforded to public bodies by the courts, coupled with recent reforms to the judicial review process, make it a remedy of last resort that can be difficult for taxpayers to pursue successfully. In overturning the High Court’s refusal of the taxpayers’ judicial review claim, the Court of Appeal in Murphy v HMRC confirmed that HMRC had breached their legitimate expectation as to the application of an extra-statutory concession. While Murphy is unlikely to be the harbinger of a wholesale rebalancing of the judicial review scales in the taxpayer’s favour, it is a welcome step in the right direction.
Read moreTax Bites – July 2024
Welcome to the latest edition of RPC's Tax Bites – providing monthly bite-sized updates from the tax world.
Read moreStay connected and subscribe to our latest insights and views
Subscribe Here