Search results
1974 results ordered by
Banking and Financial Markets Litigation Update - Spring 2023
This update is brought to you by RPC’s top tier banking and financial markets disputes practice in London, with specialists in all areas of financial markets litigation (and arbitration) and a wealth of expertise including frequent involvement in the most complex, high-value, and high-profile disputes in the sphere. Here, we take a look at some of the most important judgments in recent months.
Read moreHigh Court favours English jurisdiction in bribery claim brought by Kuwaiti pension fund
The High Court recently rejected an application, brought by two defendants to an alleged bribery claim advanced by a Kuwaiti pension fund, that the claim should be heard before the Swiss courts, holding that England was the proper jurisdiction both in order to avoid the risk of fragmentation of proceedings, and in view of the close connection of the claim to England.
Read moreCourt of Appeal finds that Bitcoin's developers may owe fiduciary duties to bitcoin owners
In a highly anticipated judgment, the Court of Appeal has handed down its decision in Tulip Trading Limited v van der Laan and others [2023] EWCA Civ 83, allowing the claimant's appeal. The court found that the developers looking after Bitcoin arguably owed fiduciary duties in tort to an owner of bitcoin, and whether such a duty did arise in the specific proceedings would depend on the facts established at trial.
Read moreConsidering bringing an RFI application? Is it strictly necessary?
Andrew Ayres KC and Andrew Dinsmore (Twenty Essex), instructed by Parham Kouchikali and Suzie Kurdi of this firm, successfully resisted a Request for Further Information (RFI) in the High Court.
Read moreCourt of Appeal rejects timing and informed consent defences in bond bribery case
In a recent decision, the Court of Appeal decided in Trafalgar Multi Asset Trading Company Limited (in liquidation) v James David Hadley and others that pleaded defences to a bribery claim were so fanciful as to entitle the claimant to summary judgment.
Read moreHigh Court rejects Group Litigation Order in FSMA litigation as it would not further the Overriding Objective
In a recent decision in Edward Moon & Ors v Link Fund Solutions, Mr Justice Trower dismissed an application by two groups of claimants, declining to make the Group Litigation Order (GLO) sought.
Read moreNo loss? No Quincecare claim … the Supreme Court judgment in Stanford International Bank v HSBC
The Supreme Court has handed down its judgment in Stanford International Bank Ltd v HSBC Bank plc, deciding that there was no pecuniary loss suffered by the Claimant and therefore no basis for a Quincecare claim.
Read moreNo need for perfection: ISDA Master Agreement default notice still valid where some errors made
The High Court has decided that a default notice under an ISDA Master Agreement is still valid even if it does not contain wholly accurate statements of the amount of the payment not made, the confirmation of the trade, or the currency of the payment.
Read moreLegal claims against banks expected following collapse in Sterling
Legal disputes between banks and their business customers are expected following the collapse in the value of sterling against the U.S. Dollar and the volatility of other currencies, says international law firm RPC.
Read moreItalian Local Authority succeeds in swap claim before the English Court
In a significant judgment in Banca Intesa Sanpaolo SpA v Comune di Venezia [2022] EWHC 2586, the English Commercial Court has found that, as a consequence of the 2020 decision of the Italian Supreme Court in Banca Nazionale del Lavoro SpA v Comune di Cattolica (Cattolica), English law governed interest rate swaps entered into by the Municipality of Venice (Venice) were void for lack of capacity. Venice was therefore entitled to restitution for the amounts paid to the Banks under the interest rate swaps. However, the English Court also found that the Banks were in principle entitled to rely on a defence of change of position in respect of payments made under back-to-back swaps with other financial institutions which operates to reduce the sums recoverable by Venice.
Read moreLitigation risk arising from recent LDI related disruption in the UK gilt market
In this bulletin, we examine the role of Liability Driven Investment (LDI) in the widely publicised disruption experienced in the UK gilts market in recent weeks and consider the disputes which might result.
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 moreCompeting subordinated debts – the lessons learnt from Lehmans' insolvency
Some 13 years ago, Lehman Brothers' sudden and unexpected insolvency sent ripples across the banking and financial services market, some of which are still felt today. The Court of Appeal's decision in the consolidated cases of Lehman Brothers Holdings Scottish LP 3 v Lehman Brothers Holdings plc (in administration) and others [2021] EWCA Civ 1523 was the latest in a long line of cases seeking to unwind the issues arising from Lehman Brothers' unexpected collapse.
Read moreHigh Court decides that reviving proceedings automatically stayed under CPR 15.11 requires relief from sanctions
In a recent judgment, the English Commercial Court in Bank of America Europe DAC v CITTA Metropolitana Di Milano has provided guidance on the "automatic stay" provisions of CPR 15.11 and the circumstances in which parties can revive dormant proceedings subject to such an automatic stay.
Read moreAPP fraud: Commercial Court considers approach to unjust enrichment and knowing receipt claims
The recent Commercial Court decision of Tecnimont Arabia Limited v National Westminster Bank PLC(1) considered the court's approach to a claim for unjust enrichment against a recipient bank in an authorised push payment (APP) fraud context. In particular, the Court examined whether the enrichment can be said to be at the 'expense' of the claimant, what factors amount to enrichment being 'unjust' and when the defence of 'change of position' is available. In relation to knowing receipt, the court considered the question of when property is 'trust property' for the purposes of the cause of action.
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 morePrivy Council decides that banks owe no Quincecare duty to a beneficial owner of monies in an account
A bank does not owe the beneficial owner of account monies any duty of care in negligence, including any Quincecare duty: this was the conclusion of the Privy Council in the Isle of Man case Royal Bank of Scotland International Ltd v JP SPC4 and another. The appeal concerned a fraud where the account holder had defrauded the beneficial owner of the monies, an investment fund, by paying funds out of the relevant bank accounts in contravention of a legitimate investment scheme.
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 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 moreWhere's the damage? High Court dismisses jurisdiction challenge in US$495 million claim
The High Court has dismissed UBS' challenge to jurisdiction in a ca. US$495 million claim – and in doing so set out useful guidance in terms of how the Court will determine "where the damage has occurred" in cases of economic loss. The judge looked for the most "natural analysis" in determining the manifestation of the loss, and broadly agreed that "the usual answer [in bad investment cases] will be that the loss occurs in, and at the place of, the bank account which was depleted."
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 moreNo knowing receipt claim where equitable interest is destroyed: Byers v Saudi National Bank
The Court of Appeal has held that a claim in knowing receipt will fail if, at the moment of receipt, the beneficiary’s equitable proprietary interest is destroyed or overridden so that the recipient holds the property as beneficial owner.
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 moreLimitation Act 1980 s.32(1): whether a claimant could have discovered fraud with "reasonable diligence" extends to events prior to accrual of the cause of action
The High Court found that, when considering the postponement of the limitation period for the purposes of Section 32(1) of the Limitation Act 1980, the question of whether the claimant could have discovered the fraud with "reasonable diligence" extends to the period before the claimant suffered a loss.
Read moreUpdated P.R.I.M.E. Finance Arbitration Rules launched for 2022
P.R.I.M.E Finance, the Hague-based Panel of Recognised International Market Experts in Finance, has launched updated P.R.I.M.E Finance Arbitration Rules (the Rules), which come into force from 1 January 2022.
Read moreSummary judgment application does not amount to submission to English jurisdiction
Does applying for summary judgment application before the determination of a parallel application for a stay, amount to a step in the proceedings that results submission to the jurisdiction?
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 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 morePart 4 – AI Regulation in Asia
This is Part 4 of 'Regulation of AI – raising the trillion dollar bAIby'
Read moreOfcom and ICO to collaborate on Online Safety and Data Protection
How are the data protection and broadcasting regulators collaborating to regulate online services from a safety and privacy perspective, and what does this mean for businesses and services regulated by both bodies?
Read moreNew development: DPDI Bill fails to become law
The Data Protection and Digital Information Bill (DPDIB), the proposal for post-Brexit data protection laws in the UK, did not pass through Parliament before its dissolution on 24 May 2024 ahead of the general election on 4 July 2024. This means that the DPDIB has failed to become law and any proposals for data reform in the UK will largely need to start afresh in the new Parliament.
Read moreICO forces Serco Leisure to stop using facial recognition technology for employees
In what circumstances can facial recognition technology (FRT) be acceptable to monitor employees in the workplace?
Read moreThe ICO’s strategic approach to regulating AI
How can the ICO’s recently published AI strategy paper help businesses navigate the evolving AI regulatory landscape, particularly in respect of data protection principles?
Read moreICO publishes guidance on content moderation
What steps should businesses operating content moderation systems in the UK be taking to comply with new guidance published by the UK’s Information Commissioner (ICO)?
Read more“Consent or pay” models under scrutiny in UK and EU
Are “consent or pay” business models compliant with data protection law?
Read moreThe Role of AI in Disputes
While lawyers have had various forms of AI available to them for years, it is generative AI and the development of large language models (LLMs) which is likely to represent a fundamental shift for dispute resolution. This technology now offers language capabilities that have never been seen before, and is likely to transform the way lawyers conduct proceedings.
Read moreAI-as-a-Service – Key Issues
Artificial Intelligence-as-a-Service (AIaaS), in the same vein as Software-as-a-Service and Infrastructure-as-a-Service, refers to cloud-based tools that allow businesses to gain access to an AI model hosted by a third party provider.
Read moreProcuring AI – Commercial Considerations Checklist
Many companies will no doubt be considering using AI within their business to take advantage of the massive opportunities for increased productivity and cost efficiencies promised.
Read moreGenerative AI – Addressing Copyright
When it comes to the interaction of AI and IP rights, bar a flurry of activity surrounding the inevitable outcome by all of the courts including the Supreme Court in the Thaler, Dabus case, most attention has been focussed on copyright. There are three main potentially thorny issues and all have been extensively covered by the mainstream media.
Read moreAI and Privacy – 10 Questions to Ask
We set out in this section 10 key questions to ask yourself at the outset when developing or deploying AI solutions in your business.
Read moreThe Ethics of AI - The Digital Dilemma
This is Part 6 of 'Regulation of AI – raising the trillion dollar bAIby'
Read morePart 6 – Practical Considerations
This is Part 6 of 'Regulation of AI – raising the trillion dollar bAIby'
Read morePart 5 – AI Regulation Globally
This is Part 5 of 'Regulation of AI – raising the trillion dollar bAIby'
Read morePart 3 - AI regulation in the US
Back in October 2022, the White House published federal guidance – a Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights identifying five principles aiming to guide the design, use, and deployment of automated systems. It was designed to operate as a roadmap to protect the public from AI harms and was followed in October 2023 by the US President's Executive Order on the Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence...
Read morePart 2 - AI regulation in the EU
The EU AI Act, the main elements of which are covered in our previous article, was provisionally agreed in December 2023. Shortly after it was agreed, the Commission released some Q&As to flesh out the key provisions and timelines for application. It is anticipated that the latest text of the Artificial Intelligence Act will be formally adopted by both Parliament and Council in April, triggering a graduated two year period for compliance (with obligations for high-risk systems defined in Annex II applicable in 3 years).
Read morePart 1 - UK AI regulation
There has been consistent messaging from the UK Conservative-led government that the UK has decided to adopt a light touch approach to regulating AI. This was evident in the AI white paper published in March 2023 which outlined a principles based framework (see ['The Ethics of AI – the Digital Dilemma'] for more information about the principles themselves and see here for additional coverage of the AI white paper). The UK government held a consultation on the AI white paper in 2023 and published a response on 6 February 2024 that adds slightly more flesh to the bones of the UK framework.
Read moreStay connected and subscribe to our latest insights and views
Subscribe Here