Skip to main content

Search results

54 results ordered by

Perspective - Blog

The Future of Insolvency Regulation

Published on 04 Jan 2022. By Rachael Healey, Partner

On 21 December 2021 the Government launched a consultation into the future of insolvency regulation. The changes proposed in the consultation document will have a wide ranging impact on the insolvency profession (and its insurers) with the proposals including: the direct regulation of insolvency firms, the introduction of a single regulatory body with powers to order compensation against insolvency practitioners and firms, a new additional requirements regime, changes to the bond regime and a public register of insolvency practitioners and firms. Many of the changes proposed require primary legislation and so it may be some time before the changes to take effect (if adopted). But there does appear to be some wind behind these proposals given they follow on from the Call for Evidence in 2019 and a more general focus on insolvency issues in the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic.

Read more
Perspective - Blog

The CAT's new approach: I can't afford a carriage (dispute)

Published on 02 Jun 2023. By Chris Ross, Partner and Leonia Chesterfield, Of Counsel

Since the collective proceedings regime in the UK's Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) kicked off, a number of carriage disputes have arisen. So-called 'carriage disputes' arise when there are two or more competing proposed class representatives (PCRs) seeking certification (and therefore 'carriage') of overlapping class actions.

Read more
Perspective - Blog

Silicon Valley, Signature and Credit Suisse: what do they all share(holder) in common?

Published on 28 Mar 2023. By James Wickes, Partner and Oliver Knox, Partner and Jessica Pease, Associate

In what has been termed "the biggest banking crisis since 2008", both Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) and Signature Bank have collapsed, and Credit Suisse has been rescued. Whether more banks are to follow suit is yet to be seen.

Read more
Perspective - Blog

Full and frank disclosure means more than just putting relevant matters in evidence – a new year warning in UKIP v Braine & Others

Published on 24 Jan 2020. By Geraldine Elliott, Partner

New year, new reminder of the obligation to make full and frank disclosure in without notice applications, this time in the context of a falling out within the UKIP party. The obligation can only be satisfied by drawing the court's attention to legal or factual matters which could undermine the applicant's own application; it is not enough to simply put relevant matters in evidence before the court (UKIP v Braine & Others). Injunction, confidential, publication and non-disclosure.

Read more

Stay connected and subscribe to our latest insights and views 

Subscribe Here