Search results
156 results ordered by
Gleeson Privies: Can non-parties to an arbitration be estopped by it?
The recent judgment in PJSC National Bank Trust and others v Boris Mints and others(1) clarifies that arbitral proceedings can give rise to an issue estoppel or abuse of process claim against a non-party who is a "privy" of a party to the arbitration. However, the court observed that this would be exceptional given the contractual and confidential nature of arbitration.
Read moreAre you a "person discharging managerial responsibility"? High Court clarifies meaning of PDMRs under FSMA
In a recent interim decision in Allianz Global Investors GmbH and Ors v G4S Ltd (formerly G4S plc) [2022] EWHC 1081 (Ch), Mr Justice Miles clarified the scope of the expression "persons discharging managerial responsibility" ("PDMRs") for the purpose of establishing liability under s.90A and Schedule 10A of Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 ("FSMA").
Read moreIrrelevant to any issue in the proceedings? High Court orders complete re-review of party's redactions under disclosure pilot scheme
In JSC Commercial Bank Privatbank v Kolomoisky and other the English court determined that, having adopted an unduly narrow approach to relevance, the first defendant should conduct a complete re-review of each of over 6,000 WhatsApp messages in order to determine whether the redactions that had been applied could be maintained, and to provide further information about each redacted message.
Read moreIs the crypto market at the end of its Tether?
The crashing out of Terra has unleashed fears of unsettled investors, rising disputes and fraud exposure.
Read moreCourt of Appeal says no to purely factual appeals
In the context of a dispute as to whether funding provided from a father to his son to purchase a property constituted a gift or a loan, the Court of Appeal re-articulated the very limited circumstances in which an appeal court may interfere with a trial judge's conclusions on primary facts. The trial judge must be "plainly wrong", in the sense that their conclusion was "rationally insupportable" in order to warrant such interference. The court also considered a list of features of purely factual appeals which are unlikely to succeed in the appeal court.
Read moreCourt of Appeal upholds the CAT's opt-out certification in Le Patourel v BT
Last week, the Court of Appeal delivered its judgment in Le Patourel v BT Group. BT's appeal against the Competition Appeal Tribunal's decision to grant a collective proceedings order (CPO) on an opt-out* basis was unsuccessful. In a claimant-friendly ruling, the Court of Appeal held that the CAT's opt-out determination was correct and that direct account crediting at distribution stage would be permissible.
Read moreCourt of Appeal strikes out defences that funds' losses resulting from FX manipulation have been passed on to investors following redemption
In Allianz Global Investors GmbH & Ors v Barclays Bank PLC & Ors(1), the Court of Appeal allowed an appeal by the claimant funds (the Funds) and struck out defences by the Defendant banks (the Banks) that losses incurred by the Funds had been avoided or passed on upon redemption by their investors.
Read moreHong Kong – General adjournment of court proceedings ends with more guidance for remote hearings
Hong Kong's general adjournment of court proceedings ends with more guidance for remote hearings.
Read moreCommercial Court confirms limits of full and frank disclosure duty in arbitration enforcement action
What happens when a party makes a without notice application? How far should it go to meet its obligation of full and frank disclosure? The Commercial Court gave clear guidance on the limits of this duty when it dismissed the latest claim by the State of Libya that challenged General Dynamic's permission to enforce an arbitral award in General Dynamics United Kingdom Ltd v State of Libya.(1) This was one in a series of cases between the company and the North African country.
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 moreCourt of Appeal holds that Quincecare duty can arise in principle where customer gives instructions in authorised push payment fraud
The Court of Appeal has clarified in Philipp v Barclays Bank UK Plc [2022] EWCA Civ 318 that the Quincecare duty, which requires a bank to refrain from acting on a payment instruction and to make inquiries when it is on notice of a serious possibility of fraud, can arise for a bank even where it is the customer themselves giving instructions to pay money out of their account to a fraudster.
Read moreCourt of Appeal draws distinction between claims for recovery of tax and restitution for tax paid out fraudulently
In Skatteforvaltningen v Solo Capital Partners,(1) the Court of Appeal investigated in detail the operation of rule 3(1) of Dicey, Morris & Collins on the Conflict of Laws (edition 15) (Dicey rule 3), which provides that English courts do not have jurisdiction over actions for "the enforcement, either directly or indirectly, of a penal, revenue, or other public law of a foreign State". The Court decided that the Danish tax authority's claim did not fall within Dicey rule 3 as it concerned the restitution of monies misappropriated by fraud rather than enforcement of tax.
Read moreCompeting opt-out claims refused certification in CAT's FX decision
Since the first opt-out certification last summer in Merricks, a steady stream of collective claims has been certified by the CAT. There have now been four opt-out certifications with many more applications in the wings. Last week's FX decision is the CAT's first certification refusal following Merricks.
Read moreHong Kong – General adjournment of court proceedings given severity of “5th Wave” of COVID-19
Given the severity of the “5th Wave” of the pandemic in Hong Kong, on 4 March 2022 the judiciary announced another “general adjournment of proceedings”; this time to run from 7 March to 11 April 2022.
Read moreCourt of Appeal holds that Quincecare duty can arise where the customer gives instructions in authorised push payment fraud
The Court of Appeal has allowed an appeal in relation to a bank's Quincecare duty and authorised push payment fraud, finding in favour of the customer who lost the bulk of her life savings.
Read moreHigh Court finds that a cryptocurrency exchange arrangement was not a trust
The High Court decided that no trust could arise where two parties had agreed to an exchange of cryptocurrencies (in essence a sale and repurchase agreement), as the essential economic reciprocity precluded the existence of any trust.
Read moreESG claims in the banking and financial markets Sector: will "greenwashing" claims soon be common in the UK?
Environmental, Social and Governance "ESG" funds are an attractive avenue for investors seeking responsible investment choices.
Read moreHide and Seek: Limitation Periods in Competition Law Damages Claims
The recent judgment in Gemalto v Infineon and Renesas put back into focus the duty of potential claimants in competition damages claims to reasonably investigate potential claims against cartelists when relevant facts emerge.
Read moreCase closed: Court of Appeal has no inherent jurisdiction to review decision by single Court of Appeal Judge refusing permission to appeal if refusal is 'arguably wrong'
The Court of Appeal has confirmed that it has no inherent jurisdiction (outside Civil Procedure Rule.52.30 which applies in very limited circumstances) to reopen an appeal where a single judge has refused permission
Read moreHow aware were you? High Court refuses to strike out fraudulent misrepresentation claim in VW 'Dieselgate' emissions
In Crossley and others v Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft and others(1) the High Court refused to strike out or summarily dismiss the fraudulent misrepresentation claim brought by more than 86,000 vehicle owners against Volkswagen ("VW").
Read moreHigh Court dismisses application for extension of limitation period on basis of fraud at summary judgment stage
In Libyan Investment Authority v Credit Suisse International & Ors ([2021] EWHC 2684 (Comm), the Commercial Court granted summary judgment dismissing the Libyan Investment Authority's (LIA's) claims against Credit Suisse International (Credit Suisse) and others on the grounds that they were time-barred.
Read moreIs your phone tracking you? Perhaps, but it is a mere witness to your whereabouts according to the Court of Appeal
In EUI Ltd v UK Vodaphone Ltd(1) a claimant insurance company sought a Norwich Pharmacal order for mobile phone records to prove that an insurance claim had been falsely made.
Read moreHigh Court clarifies new witness evidence rules and requirement for list of documents under Practice Direction 57AC
Only list the documents used to refresh the memory of the witness, use the statement of best practice as a checklist and follow the principles of the practice direction: these are some of the main points arising out of the decision in Mansion Place Ltd v Fox Industrial Services Ltd [2021] EWHC 2747 (TCC), the first decision to give substantial guidance on the new witness statement rules under Practice Direction (PD) 57 AC.
Read moreEnglish Commercial Court upholds the validity of swap contracts entered into by an Italian local authority
The Commercial Court has found that there was no limitation on the capacity of the Italian local authority Busto di Arsizio to enter into a valid swap contracts with Deutsche Bank.
Read moreCourt of Appeal holds that uncontroverted expert evidence can be rejected
The Court of Appeal has held that there is no rule that an uncontroverted expert report which complies with CPR PD 35 cannot be impugned in submissions and ultimately rejected by the judge.
Read moreHigh Court finds agency relationship and 'control' for purposes of disclosure where third party not authorised to sign contract for principal
In Quartz Assets LLC and another v Kestrel Coal Midco Pty Ltd [2021] EWHC 2675 (Comm), the High Court held that a third party authorised to conduct contractual negotiations on behalf of the Defendant, but not sign the contract, was acting as an agent, and that relevant documents which it had created were therefore in the Defendant's control and ought to be disclosed. The decision emphasises that the courts will consider substance over form when determining whether an agency relationship exists, and constitutes a reminder of the definition of 'control' for the purposes of disclosure.
Read moreChoose your words wisely: waiving privilege in witness evidence
In a cautionary tale for litigators, the High Court has ordered disclosure of privileged notes of a conversation after a witness referred to the conversation in his witness statement.(1)
Read moreHigh Court refuses permission for unissued contempt application where breach of freezing order only technical
In Pharmagona Limited v Taheri,(1) the High Court refused to seal and issue a contempt application as the breach, if it had occurred, was only technical, and it was therefore inappropriate for the application to succeed.
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 moreExceptional Circumstances: CPR 52.30 and a lesson on drafting grounds of appeal from the Court of Appeal
The Court of Appeal has given guidance on how to draft grounds of appeal in a rap over the knuckles for lawyers responsible for "over-lengthy and ill-focused" grounds (Municipio de Mariana v (1) BHP Group PLC and (2) BHP Group Ltd(i)).
Read moreCrypto-assets again confirmed as property by the English Commercial Court
In the Commercial Court's latest crypto-related judgment, Fetch.AI(1), a proprietary injunction and worldwide freezing order were granted against various categories of persons unknown who had misappropriated various crypto-assets from one of the claimant's Binance trading accounts. In doing so, the Court agreed with the key finding in the seminal case AA v Persons Unknown, Re Bitcoin [2019] EWHC 3556 (Comm) – that bitcoin is 'property' – albeit it did so on a different basis.
Read moreForum conveniens – English High Court decides that parallel proceedings are not a "trump card" when determining jurisdiction
Hot on the heels of another recent decision on forum conveniens, PJSC National Bank Trust v Mints(1) (see our article on this decision), the English High Court has re-affirmed that the risk of irreconcilable decisions from parallel proceedings in other jurisdictions is not a "trump card" in determining the proper forum for a dispute.
Read moreExpert evidence is not an absolute right: High Court issues stark reminder that breaches of rules on expert evidence will not be tolerated
The High Court has recently issued a stark reminder that breaches of the rules on expert evidence will not be tolerated.
Read moreHigh Court reminds us of the principles of res judicata and abuse of process
The court has and will act to prevent claims being re-litigated by parties not content with earlier outcomes; Elite Property Holdings Limited v Barclays Bank(1)
Read moreExceptions to the without prejudice rule – another retrenchment
The Court of Appeal has resisted the temptation to provide clarity on the scope and application of the so-called Muller(1) exception to the without prejudice rule. In Berkeley Square Holdings Limited v Lancer Property Asset Management Limited(2), it indicated that recent first instance decisions had strayed beyond the facts in Muller, a development that might widen the scope of the exception unjustifiably.
Read moreHand in your notice - how to bring a successful warranty claim
Buyers wishing to make a claim under contractual warranty provisions must comply with those provisions to the letter; sufficient and timely information is key. In Arani & Others v Cordic Group(1), the buyer had given inadequate notice of its contractual warranty claim and also could not bring a misrepresentation claim based on the warranties.
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 moreForum conveniens – context is key
The English High Court has allowed conspiracy proceedings brought by two Russian banks against several Russian nationals to proceed in England, despite there being "no doubt, and no dispute, that [it] is a Russian case".(1)
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 moreA Lack of List of Issues for Disclosure is not a bar to specific disclosure under the Disclosure Pilot Scheme
The court can order specific disclosure under the Disclosure Pilot Scheme, even where there is no agreed or approved List of Issues for Disclosure HMRC v IGE USA Investments Ltd and Ors(1).
Read moreDoes an expert owe a fiduciary duty to its client?
For the first time, the Court of Appeal has considered the duties of an expert concurrently engaged on two potentially conflicting disputes. While this case involved an unusual set of circumstances, it provides an interesting review of the duties owed by expert witnesses to their clients and the Court, and highlights important considerations for those engaging expert witnesses and drafting engagement letters Secretariat Consulting Pte Ltd, Secretariat International UK Ltd, Secretariat Advisors LLC v A Company.(1)
Read moreA new cause of action can only be introduced by amendment if it arises out of substantially the same facts that remain in issue at the time of the amendment
Pleadings that have previously been struck out cannot be used to introduce a new, limitation-barred claim that arises out of substantially the same set of facts as the struck out claim according to the Court of Appeal in Libyan Investment Authority v King [2020] EWCA Civ 1690.
Read moreBeware of trying to address gaps in your evidence during trial: High Court refuses permission to rely on a new witness statement prepared part-way through trial
The "inherent unreliability" in evidence prepared during trial, and the high risk that the evidence had been tailored to fit the current state of the claimant's case, caused the High Court to refuse the claimant permission to rely on a witness statement of one its in-house lawyers, prepared during an ongoing trial, and to call that witness to give oral evidence during the trial. (1)
Read moreLate service of evidence requires relief from sanctions
An application to admit witness evidence outside the directions timetable should be treated like an application for relief from sanctions under CPR 3.9 according to the High Court in Wolf Rock (Cornwall) Ltd v Langhelle
Read moreStay connected and subscribe to our latest insights and views
Subscribe Here