Search results
176 results ordered by
Choose 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 moreLargest 'white elephant' in history of group actions
BHP successfully applies to strike out 200,000 claims as an abuse of process. Had the judge not struck the claims out, he would have stayed proceedings on jurisdictional grounds under Article 34 and the doctrine of forum non conveniens. (1)
Read moreCan an appeal court order repayment after it has reversed the relevant order?
An appellate court has an inherent power to restore money paid or property transferred under an order which it has reversed. And not all contractual provisions are susceptible to being waived by election. These are the two key takeaways from the Privy Council's judgment in Delta Petroleum (Caribbean) Ltd v British Virgin Islands Electricity Corporation [2020] UKPC 23.
Read moreHidden owners, ostensible authority and the Duomatic principle
The Duomatic principle can apply to ostensible authority as well as actual authority, according to the Privy Council in Ciban Management Corporation v Citco (BVI) Ltd & Anor (British Virgin Islands) [2020] UKPC 21.
Read moreHold on to your seats: UK Supreme Court ends the argument about the law governing arbitration agreements
Identifying what law governs a contractual term requiring the parties to arbitrate their disputes, rather than taking them to court, can be profoundly important.
Read moreCFH Clearing Limited v Merrill Lynch International [2020] EWCA Civ 1064
The Court of Appeal has held that "Market Practice" is too wide a term to be implied into an ISDA Master Agreement covering currency trading transactions, in dismissing a claim arising from the "de-pegging" of the Swiss Franc from the Euro.
Read moreHMRC Crackdown on Facilitation of Tax Evasion
Increased pressure on HMRC to boost tax revenues due to the economic cost of COVID-19 may bring about a surge in charging decisions for failure to prevent the facilitation of tax evasion (Corporate Criminal Offences (CCO)).
Read moreDisputes, disputed: The court’s approach to competing dispute resolution clauses in successive agreements
How are contradictory dispute resolution clauses resolved, where the agreements are entered into at different times? Intention and purpose is key, as set out in the test in BNP Paribas v Trattamento, where parties intended two agreements to perform separate roles as part of one transaction (even though the second is not contemplated at the time of the first).
Read moreLIBOR claim by US agency will continue in London
A decision in the London High Court has demonstrated that the fallout from the long-running LIBOR fixing scandal is far from over.
Read moreHong Kong Courts – COVID-19 Update
The general adjourned period (GAP), during which the courts were closed save for urgent and essential business, ended on 3 May 2020, enabling the courts to resume normal business in Hong Kong. Since then, the number of reported cases of COVID-19 in Hong Kong has approximately tripled following a third wave of infections.
Read moreCourts reach a landing on the test for jurisdiction over co-defendants
The court can only assert jurisdiction over an EU domiciled co-defendant under Article 8(1) of the Recast Brussels Regulation if the claim against the anchor defendant is sustainable.
Read moreEl Dorado in the Commercial Court: Domestic Law, Foreign Law and Foreign Relations
Why is a dispute between Mr Nicolás Maduro and Mr Juan Guaidó as the rival contenders to the Presidency of Venezuela being heard by the English Commercial Court? The answer involves US$1 billion of gold reserves held at the Bank of England and who has the authority to deal with them.
Read moreIt's good to talk
A successful party has been declined some of its costs on the basis of an unreasonable refusal to engage in mediation. Wales (t/a Selective Investment Services) v CBRE Managed Services Ltd & Aviva.
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 moreHong Kong Courts – Further guidance on remote court hearings
A second, more comprehensive guidance note on remote hearings in civil proceedings came into effect on 15 June 2020. The phase 2 guidance note provides for expanded videoconferencing facilities and telephone hearings with respect to the civil business of the first instance courts and the Court of Appeal, and is to be read together with the phase 1 guidance note issued on 2 April 2020.
Read moreFreezing orders: risk of dissipation? Get real
The High Court has issued an important reminder of the need for solid evidence of a real risk that the respondent will take steps to dissipate their assets to frustrate a judgment in applications to continue a worldwide freezing order (WFO). Evidence of dishonesty alone is not enough, and conduct falling short of dishonesty is less likely to suffice. Evidence of untrustworthiness, or even dishonesty, does not amount to sufficiently robust evidence of a real risk of dissipation to continue a worldwide freezing order.
Read moreHong Kong Courts – Expansion of use of remote hearings
As expected, the judiciary in Hong Kong has announced that it will expand the use of remote hearings for civil cases. The first Guidance Note for Remote Hearings for Civil Business in the High Court (Phase 1) came into effect on 3 April 2020. This was during the general adjourned period (GAP), when the courts were generally closed as a result of COVID-19, save for urgent and essential court business. The GAP came to an end on 3 May 2020.
Read moreHong Kong Courts – Closing the GAP
The general adjourned period (GAP), during which the courts in Hong Kong were closed save for urgent and essential court business, started on 29 January 2020 with the early onset of COVID-19 in Hong Kong.
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 moreHigh Court provides a reminder against "over-lawyering" of witness statements
In a reminder not to "over-lawyer" witness statements, a High Court judge has ordered that statements be revised to remove inappropriate content(1).
Read moreGeneral adjournment in Hong Kong does not extend duration of ex parte injunction
In Hong Kong, the courts have generally been closed, save for urgent and essential court business as a result of COVID-19.
Read moreCOVID-19 – Hong Kong Courts set for phased reopening from May
On 22 April 2020, the Hong Kong Judiciary announced that the general adjourned period ("GAP") for court proceedings, which started on 29 January 2020, will end on 3 May 2020. Stressing that the health and safety of court users, the Judiciary's staff and Judges and Judicial Officers ("JJOs") remains paramount, the Judiciary will move to a phased reintroduction of general business.
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 moreCOVID-19: Trials - the show must go on
Judges are taking to heart the HMCTS's guidance focused on encouraging judges to maximise the use of video and telephone hearings using current technology. So, while the theatres in the UK remain closed, the theatres of justice continue with their activities.
Read moreCOVID-19 – Hong Kong Courts handling urgent and essential matters
On 8 April 2020, the Hong Kong Judiciary announced that the general adjourned period ("GAP") for court proceedings will continue until at least 3 May 2020. During the GAP, court registries and offices are, for the most part, closed. However, the GAP does not apply to "urgent and essential court hearings and/or matters".
Read moreStay connected and subscribe to our latest insights and views
Subscribe Here