Search results
242 results ordered by
Changing retail landscape leads to decline in employee numbers
The retail sector continues to face change and challenge from every conceivable angle and employment within the sector is following this trend.
Read moreSRA consults the legal sector on proposed changes to their fining framework
The SRA is conducting a consultation from the 28 June to 20 September 2024 on their proposed changes to the SRA Fining Guidance. The regulator is seeking feedback in response to the new unlimited fining powers granted under the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act (ECCTA 2023).
Read moreSRA fining powers – putting the SDT out of business?
The SRA is on a mission to increase its powers to levy financial penalties. The last 12 months have seen a substantial increase in its fining powers, and a grant of unlimited fining powers in matters relating to financial crime and SLAPPs is imminent. The SRA has now dramatically upped the ante, seeking the power to levy unlimited fines in all cases of serious misconduct. With the Legal Services Board appearing supportive, the proposal has the potential profoundly to affect the enforcement of professional discipline within the profession.
Read moreEnhanced Regulatory Supervision of Asset Managers in Europe – Greenwashing Risks
A common methodology has been developed by ESMA to allow national European regulators to share knowledge and experiences to facilitate convergence in how they supervise sustainability related disclosures.
Read moreCosts recovered in the Small Claims Track from an unreasonable Litigant in Person
Most (if not all) litigators will be familiar with the challenge of being on the other side of a claim brought by a litigant in person ("LiP"). The courts expect practitioners to be sensitive to their opponent's lack of legal expertise and familiarity with court rules, but judges have also been clear that they expect all parties – including LiPs – to follow the rules regardless of their legal representation.
Read moreSRA issues Warning Notice on solicitors' involvement in SLAPPs
SLAPPs (aka 'Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation') is a term coined in the USA. They are becoming the object of increasing concern over here too.
Read moreHong Kong – Claim pleading duty of care against auditor struck out for "putting the cart before the horse"
In Chan Kam Cheung v Ronnie K W Choi & Anor [2022] HKCFI 3028, a judge upheld a master's (judicial officer's) decision to strike out the plaintiff shareholder's action against the former auditors of the company.
Read moreSolicitors Entitled to Insurance Cover for Liability for Fees: Royal Sun Alliance Insurance Limited & Others v Tughans (a firm)
In a recent judgment, Foxton J held that a claim for damages against a firm of solicitors for fees which it was contractually entitled to was covered under the firm's professional indemnity insurance. He held that it did not matter if the fees were obtained through the solicitor's fraudulent misrepresentation provided that the solicitor had done what was required under the contract to earn the fees. The decision will not be welcomed by insurers.
Read moreShorter time limit for Third Parties (Rights Against Insurers) Act 2010 claims
A recent judgment has reduced the limitation period for third parties to make direct claims against insurers under the Third Parties (Rights Against Insurers) Act 2010 when compared to claims under the predecessor 1930 Act. The decision will make it easier for insurers to defend such claims on limitation grounds.
Read moreRisky Business: what to do when former clients ask further questions
In Spire Property Development LLP & Anor v Withers LLP [2022] EWCA Civ 970, the Court of Appeal considered the scope of a solicitor's duty when a former client posed questions to a solicitor concerning a transaction after the retainer had ended. The judgment will be of interest to solicitors who are asked for advice in circumstances where no retainer exists.
Read moreDouble warning for legal professionals: do not cut corners with disclosure
Further to a recent decision made by the Bar Tribunals and Adjudication Service, the Bar Standards Board has suspended a "top criminal silk" from practice on grounds of professional misconduct in respect of his failure to disclose material evidence during criminal proceedings in 2007. The decision, and the judgment made by the Court of Appeal in those proceedings, reiterates the importance of the ongoing obligation on legal professionals to give disclosure and comply with their duties to the court.
Read morePost COVID-19 UK: What Will the Professional Negligence Claims Landscape Look Like?
The cost of living is at an all-time high, with interest rates increasing and inflation currently sitting at around 9%. The chances of a recession in the UK over the next two years have increased. It will come as no surprise that we expect the number of claims against law firms to rise as the economic downturn takes hold, as was the case in 2008 and recessions before it.
Read moreImportant Court of Appeal clarity on the operation of s1(4) of the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978
A recent Court of Appeal decision (in which RPC acted for the successful barrister Appellant) provides important clarification on the operation of section 1(4) of the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 (“the Act”). Although the matter concerned a contribution claim by a solicitor against a barrister brought pursuant to the Act, the decision is of wider relevance/application for litigation practitioners and the Insurance market.
Read moreThe X-Client Files: who owns a solicitor's file
It's a perennial headache for solicitors: what exactly am I supposed to do when a client asks me for 'their file'?
Read moreGood faith does not go both ways
It is common knowledge that solicitors owe fiduciary duties to their clients but what about the other way around? Do clients owe a duty of good faith to their solicitors (as an implied term of the retainer)?
Read moreFOS proposals to clear the back-log - attractive or not?
The Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) has proposed a temporary approach to the classification of certain complaints in an attempt to alleviate their complaints backlog exacerbated during the COVID-19 pandemic. The approach could see firms looking to pro-actively resolve complaints before a defined cut off date before FOS reaches a decision so that the complaint is recorded separately and not as a "change in outcome" (i.e. where a complaint has been rejected by a business and upheld by FOS). The consultation was open for a short two-week period between 4 and 18 October 2021.
Read moreAggregation under the solicitors' minimum terms: are primary layer insurers ready for potentially limitless liability?
In Baines v Dixon Coles & Gill the Court of Appeal has substantially limited the extent to which claims against solicitors can aggregate.
Read moreCovered: Insurance regulation – Asia edition
Covered: Insurance regulation – Asia edition
Read moreConsumer duty and claims handling – beware of sludge practices
The Consumer Duty is a new regulatory framework developed by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) aimed at creating a higher standard of consumer protection in the retail markets. The FCA expects the Consumer Duty to be a significant shift for the market in terms of its expectations on firms and in this blog we consider this shift in the context of insurance claims handling.
Read moreNo objection: When is a party barred from challenging jurisdiction where it continues in the arbitration?
The High Court has provided invaluable guidance on the factors that it will consider when determining when a party is barred from challenging jurisdiction under s. 67 of the Arbitration Act 1996 (the Act) by failing to raise an objection while continuing to take part in the arbitration.
Read moreNew digital markets regime guidance published for consultation
The Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 received Royal Assent on 24 May 2024. This article considers who will be impacted by the new digital markets regime, the requirements it will introduce, and how it may be enforced, and summarises the CMA’s new draft guidance under consultation on how it intends to implement the regime in practice.
Read moreThe Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act – the Competition Perspective
This article considers the key changes to general competition law under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act which received Royal Assent on 24 May 2024 and is expected to enter into force in the Autumn.
Read moreRecent CAT rulings consider distribution concerns
With two collective settlements now approved by the UK's Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) and the outcome of the first substantive trial in the case of Le Patourel v BT anticipated shortly, it is an important time for the competition collective proceedings regime as the first sums start to be paid out to affected classes.
Read moreUK CAT Collective Proceedings Spring 2024 Update
Last year, we reported on what was then a fledgling collective proceedings regime in the UK’s Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT). Our 2023 update is here. Since then, the competition collective proceedings regime has continued to grow at pace, notwithstanding the seismic Supreme Court decision in PACCAR affecting the underlying funding arrangements which underpin the entire collective proceedings landscape.
Read moreBT case may shape UK class action landscape
In January, the trial in Justin Le Patourel v. BT Group PLC[1] commenced in the U.K. Competition Appeal Tribunal, or CAT. The trial is scheduled to be heard over eight weeks.
Read moreDelay at your peril: High Court holds that two week delay causes party to lose right to object to irregularity in arbitration
In Radisson Hotels v Hayat Otel, (1). the High Court found that the claimant ("Radisson") had lost its right to challenge an arbitration award (the "Award") by continuing to take part in the proceedings for a period of two weeks after becoming aware of improper conduct by one of the arbitrators (the "Arbitrator"). The court also rejected Radisson's subsequent application seeking to redact the identities of the parties and any details which might identify them in the judgment, in order to preserve the confidentiality of the underlying arbitration (2). While the judge acknowledged Radisson's desire to keep the arbitration confidential, this ultimately did not outweigh the general public interest in open justice.
Read moreBest of both worlds with PD57AC? High Court allows opinion evidence in factual witness statement
The High Court has allowed the witness statement of a factual witness even though the claimant had previously intended to instruct him as an expert and his statement contained opinion evidence (Polypipe Limited v Peter Russell Davidson) ([2023] EWHC 1691 (Comm). The judge confirmed that such evidence is admissible where the witness is suitably qualified, but it will not be accorded the same weight as a formal expert report. Separately, this appears to be the first reported case in which the court accepted that permission for an extension to the deadline for expert reports could be made conditional on disclosure of any unserved report(s), though the court declined to prescribe that condition in this case.
Read moreScots law decision confirms that privilege doesn’t change its spots
The Scots law judgment in University of Dundee v Chakraborty [2023] CSIH 22 has reiterated that whether or not a document is protected by legal professional privilege is determined at the point in time at which the document is created. A non-privileged document cannot later acquire privileged status. The judgment also made certain findings about waiver of privilege which may be more controversial, particularly in the context of regulatory investigations.
Read moreSingapore Court of Appeal Sends Acceleration of Interest Payment Clause To The Penalty Box
Commercial contracts commonly include clauses providing for liquidated damages, accelerated repayment or late payment interest in the event one party breaches the contract.
Read moreCase Note: Anupam Mittal v Westbridge Ventures II Investment Holdings [2023] SGCA 1 – Examining the law governing arbitrability at the pre-award stage
The Court of Appeal ("CA") in the case of Anupam Mittal v Westbridge Ventures II Investment Holdings [2023] SGCA 1 ("Anupam Mittal") had to determine a previously undecided point of law in Singapore: which system of law governs the arbitrability of a dispute at the pre-award stage, i.e., the law of the seat of the arbitration (lex fori) or the law governing the arbitration agreement.
Read moreDoctrine of separability in arbitration: should the arbitration agreement and the main contract "sink or swim" together or alone?
In DHL Project & Chartering Ltd v Gemini Ocean Shipping Co Ltd, the Court of Appeal considered the arbitration law doctrine of separability.
Read moreArbitration jurisdictional challenge no bar to English court ordering compliance with a tribunal peremptory order
The Court of Appeal has found that the English court may grant an order requiring a party to comply with a peremptory order of a tribunal before the determination of an outstanding challenge to jurisdiction of the tribunal.
Read moreHong Kong – Parties agreed settlement terms without formal settlement agreement
In MSB International Ltd v Lok & Anor , the Court of First Instance of the High Court found that the parties had agreed a full and final settlement of all their claims in two related proceedings, by way of an exchange of without prejudice written communications between their legal representatives, although no formal draft settlement agreement referring to more comprehensive release terms and stated to be "subject to contract" had been agreed.
Read moreNo need for late night panic: Court of Appeal decides that midnight e-filing is permissible
The Court of Appeal recently considered the short, but important, procedural question of whether a document may be filed electronically at any time up to midnight on the date by which the document is due.
Read moreGreat Peace confirmed: High Court decides that test for common mistake is settled
The High Court has clarified the test to void a contract for common mistake in John Lobb S.A.S v John Lobb Ltd, confirming that the four part test laid down by the Court of Appeal in Great Peace Shipping Ltd v Ttsavliris Salvage (International) Ltd remains the relevant test.
Read moreThe FTX fallout so far and what may come next
The collapse of FTX Trading Ltd. has been as dramatic as it has been fast. Until then, FTX had been the second-largest exchange in the world.
Read moreThree Crypto firsts for the English courts
The recent judgment handed down in Jones v Persons Unknown [2022] EWHC 2543 (Comm) contained three firsts in the English Court: the imposition of a constructive trust between a crypto exchange and a victim of crypto fraud, an order for delivery up of Bitcoin, and summary judgment served by NFT airdrop. It shows the English courts' continued willingness to push the boundaries of English law in relation to the recovery of misappropriated cryptoassets. The innovative application of English law procedures and remedies to the growing problem of crypto theft and fraud is of considerable assistance to the victims of this pernicious and widespread fraudulent activity.
Read moreCourt of Appeal refuses to drive "a coach and horses" through the concept of a limited liability company in joint tortfeasor decision
The Court of Appeal upheld a finding of corporate liability, but no director accessory liability, for failure to advise of risks of property investment scheme, despite the director being the driving force behind the company's marketing of the scheme.
Read moreA balancing act: IMF confidentiality obligations do not trump duty of disclosure in Argentinian securities dispute
This case serves an illustration of the factors that the court will take into consideration when weighing up the competing interests of confidentiality obligations against the duty of disclosure, here under the rules of the disclosure pilot under PD 51U. The court found that confidentiality obligations owed to the IMF did not override the duty of disclosure. The court took into account both the scope of the confidentiality obligation and the relevancy and contemporaneous quality of the documents.
Read moreHong Kong court grants reported Norwich Pharmacal in aid of execution
Unsurprisingly, claimants want to be able to enforce their judgments, especially when the underlying proceedings have been hard-fought and (therefore) expensive.
Read moreHong Kong Court of Appeal: pre-arbitration compliance is a matter of admissibility, not jurisdiction
The Court of Appeal, in C v D [2022] HKCA 729, has confirmed that compliance with pre-arbitration procedural requirements in a contractual escalation clause is an issue going to the admissibility of the claim, and not to the arbitral tribunal's jurisdiction, and that consequently an arbitral tribunal's decision was not liable to be set aside by the Court for lack of jurisdiction under Article 34 of the UNCITRAL Model Law.
Read more"Clear and unconditional communication" determines whether arbitrator appointment was valid
On 20 June 2022, the English High Court issued summary judgment in the case of ARI v WJX. The judgment arose from a dispute as to the validity of the arbitrator appointment in a London Maritime Arbitrators Association Arbitration (LMAA) and decided that it is the clear and unconditional communication by an arbitrator which determines whether their appointment was valid, as opposed to whether a contract had been formed with the arbitrator.
Read moreCourt of Appeal confirms that conditional fee arrangements do not give rise to an implied a duty of good faith
The Court of Appeal has upheld a High Court decision that conditional fee agreements (CFAs) do not imply a duty of good faith on the part of the client. A firm of solicitors acting under a CFA who had been instructed by their client to settle proceedings on a "drop hands" basis, with no order for costs, was not entitled to recover costs from their client on the basis that the client had breached a duty of good faith. The ruling cautions solicitors who enter into CFAs about the risks of clients agreeing a settlement that deprives them of their entitlement to conditional fees.(1)
Read moreHigh Court confirms permission not needed for "Technology Assisted Review" to facilitate discovery in litigation
China Metal Recycling (Holdings) Ltd (in liquidation) v Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu,(1) is a recent decision of the Court of First Instance of the High Court that confirms that court approval is not needed for the use of technology assisted review (TAR) to facilitate the discovery process pursuant to an agreed protocol between the parties, although the court has power to order the manner in which discovery of documents is undertaken between the parties if they apply to court.
Read more"Specifically mentioned": High Court clarifies rules about documents referred to in evidence under the Disclosure Pilot
In a judgment that has recently become publicly available (Michael Wilson and Partners Ltd v Emmott and others [2022] EWHC 730 (Comm)) the High Court rejected the claimant's request for disclosure of documents referred to in a witness statement which were "bound to exist". In doing so, the court re-emphasised the importance of clarity and specificity in relation to requests for disclosure.
Read moreBack to basics on contract interpretation as Court of Appeal finds that natural meaning of settlement agreement prevails
In Schofield & Anor v Smith & Anor [2022] EWCA Civ 824, the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeals of a group of companies, finding that a settlement agreement entered into between the group companies and their bank released the companies' former administrators and their solicitors from all relevant claims, even though the settlement agreement had been agreed without the involvement of the administrators, and after the administration of the group companies had been concluded.
Read moreCourt of Appeal finds that damages-based agreements are not available to defendants
The Court of Appeal has found that damages-based agreements (DBAs) are not available to non-counterclaiming defendants (Candey Ltd v Tonstate Group Ltd & Ors). [2022] EWCA Civ 936. In reaching this conclusion, the court held that agreements between legal representatives and defendant clients, which provide for payment to the legal representative of a percentage of sums that the client has resisted paying to its opponent (and where the client received no financial benefit from its opponent), were unlawful and unenforceable.
Read moreHigh Court holds litigation funder liable for costs that pre-dated funding agreement
The Commercial Court has held a litigation funder to be jointly and severally liable for the defendants' costs from a date prior to the litigation funding agreement and despite the involvement of other funders in The ECU Group plc v HSBC Bank Plc & ors [2022] EWHC 1616 (Comm).
Read moreCommercial Court dismisses ECU claims against HSBC entities due to limitation
The Commercial Court has provided a timely reminder of the importance of limitation periods, along with the application of the law of causation in the context of claims that relate to foreign exchange markets.
Read moreFirst judgment obtained in proceedings brought by a cryptocurrency exchange in the English Courts
In HDR v Shulev and Nexo [2022] EWHC 1685 (Comm), HDR (represented by RPC), which operates the cryptocurrency exchange BitMEX, initiated stakeholder proceedings under CPR Part 86 to resolve a dispute between two rival parties claiming control, and ownership of the contents, of a trading account.
Read moreStay connected and subscribe to our latest insights and views
Subscribe Here