Search results
1726 results ordered by
Italian 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 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 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 moreA hedge or a gamble? Potential claims for losses under FX derivatives
The recent depreciation of various currencies, in particular against the US$, risks significant losses for businesses under complex foreign exchange (FX) derivative products. Jonathan Cary considers the dangers of these products in the current volatile markets and explains why there is significant potential for disputes in this area.
Read moreOverseas King's Counsel appearing remotely before Hong Kong's top court
In an interesting and fully reasoned decision, delivered against the background of "Wave-5" of the Covid-19 pandemic in Hong Kong, a judge of the Court of Final Appeal has given approval for two King's Counsel (based in London) to appear remotely at a final appeal in January 2023.
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 moreNowhere to run: why a document can be "left" with a defendant and still be served in the right way
The High Court has clarified what it means to personally serve a defendant by "leaving" a document with them and confirmed that the court has jurisdiction to make an order obliging a defendant to reveal the whereabouts of missing property.
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 moreThe October CPR update: three important changes for litigators
The traditional autumn update to the CPR this year comes with three developments of particular note for litigators: the permanent incorporation of the disclosure pilot into the CPR, amendments to the rules relating to service out of jurisdiction, and the simplification of certain Practice Directions including PD16 regarding Statements of Case (PD16).
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 moreYou've been airdropped: English court approves service by NFT and finds it arguable that cryptocurrency-exchanges hold misappropriated assets as constructive trustees
In D’Aloia v (1) Persons Unknown (2) Binance Holdings Limited & Others [2022] EWHC 1723 (Ch), the English court approved service of proceedings by NFT and found that it was arguable that cryptocurrency exchanges owed constructive trustee duties to cyber-fraud victims.
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 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 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 moreCommercial Court applies "utility" approach to declarations in Italian local authority swaps case (Deutsche Bank v Comune Di Busto Arsizio)
Following on from a decision that an Italian local authority did not lack capacity to enter into a mirror swap and interest rate swap concluded with Deutsche Bank AG London (the Bank), the Commercial Court granted some of the declarations the Bank sought, which mostly tracked express contractual representations or terms of the transactions. The court also refused permission to appeal sought by the local authority, a stay of proceedings sought by the Bank and ordered the local authority to pay all costs (Deutsche Bank AG London v Comune Di Busto Arsizio).
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 moreSebastian Holdings litigation – tail-end risks mount for Mr Vik
In the latest chapter of the attritional legal battle between Deutsche Bank AG (DBAG) and Sebastian Holdings and its principal Mr Alexander Vik (Mr Vik), DBAG has ground out yet another victory against Mr Vik. This time, the stakes are much higher than substantial sums of money – Mr Vik now faces a potential custodial sentence after having been found by the Commercial Court to have been in contempt of court for deliberately giving false evidence.
Read morePD57AC: How compliant is compliant? High Court refuses to strike out passages in fact witness statements
Lifestyle Equities CV & Anor v Royal County of Berkshire Polo Club Ltd & Ors(1), departs notably from the recent pattern of authority and guidance on the enforcement of the new witness statement Practice Direction 57AC (PD57AC).
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 more"Train of inquiry" documents: Court makes rare and exceptional order for Model E Disclosure under disclosure pilot
In a recent interim decision in the re-trial of Ras Al Khaimah Investment Authority v Azima [2022] EWHC 1295 (Ch), the Court has made a rare order for Model E Disclosure under PD 51U. The Model was applied to one issue only, which the Judge considered a "core critical issue" in dispute.
Read moreHigh Court again highlights importance of the confidentiality embargo on a draft judgment
In keeping with the run of High Court decisions on the importance of the confidentiality embargo which attaches draft judgments, the IPEC has held that an embargo was breached when journalists were provided with a press release on confidential terms, prior to the judgment being formally handed down(1). While this was a breach, the judgment clarified that certain disclosures made internally to employees of the Defendants' company were permitted, as they fell within the intended scope of CPR Part 40 and its Practice Direction.
Read moreThe "Legal Minefield" of Witness Statements for Multi-Lingual Witnesses under PD32 and PD57AC
In Bahia v Sidhu(1), the High Court considered the difficulties that arose when a witness provided written statements in English but in practice spoke a mix of two languages (English and Punjabi), and gave evidence through an interpreter. Ultimately, despite expressing reservations about choosing English for the written statements, when seen in the context of cross-examination (both in English and Punjabi) the Court found that the choice of language for the witness statements did not represent a breach of the relevant Civil Procedure Rules (the CPR).
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 moreInjunction granted over stolen NFTs held on constructive trust
In a highly anticipated judgment, the Commercial Court in Lavinia Deborah Osbourne v (1) Persons Unknown (2) Ozone Networks Inc held that "there is at least a realistically arguable case" that non-fungible tokens ('NFTs') are to be treated as property in English Law.
Read moreMarex Strikes Again: Giles v Rhind exception to rule against reflective loss is "dead for all intents and purposes"
Despite it being almost two years since the Supreme Court judgment in Marex Financial Ltd v Sevilleja [2020] UKSC 31 considered the principle of reflective loss, the courts continue to grapple with its impacts and effects in relation to existing cases, many of which were stayed pending the appeal.
Read moreGleeson 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 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 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 moreObvious arithmetical error in damages calculation is sufficient for arbitral award to be set aside for procedural irregularity, finds High Court
The High Court has found that an "obvious arithmetical error" in the calculation of damages was a procedural irregularity under s 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996 (the Act) and set aside the relevant part of the award.
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 moreStay connected and subscribe to our latest insights and views
Subscribe Here