Search results
1621 results ordered by
Largest '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 moreMore is more when giving a notice of claim under an SPA
A buyer's notice of claim pursuant to the terms of a sale and purchase agreement in a USD1 billion transaction failed adequately to comply with the notice requirements set out in the tax covenant of the SPA. As a result, a sum of USD50 million held in escrow for claims was paid out unconditionally to the sellers under the SPA. Dodika Ltd v United Good Luck Holdings Ltd [2020] EWHC 2101 (Comm).
Read moreWhen is an Application to Court an Abuse of Process?
While hearing the appeal of an application to discharge an interim order, the Court of Appeal clarified its approach to deciding when conduct is permissible and when it may amount to an abuse of process.
Read moreTo MAE or not to MAE? Commercial Court hands down preliminary issues judgment in first Covid-19 Material Adverse Effect case
In her recent decision in Travelport Limited and others v Wex Inc,(1) the Head of the Commercial Court provided topical guidance on the construction and application of Material Adverse Effect clauses in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic.
Read moreLIBOR: Litigation risks in the endgame?
In 2021 we will bid farewell to LIBOR and welcome in SONIA. The two systems work in different ways, with LIBOR looking forward and SONIA looking back.
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 moreThe LCIA Rules 2020 – what's new?
Changes in relation to complex multi-party cases and the use of technology form the backbone of the latest version of the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA)'s arbitration rules (the LCIA Rules 2020).
Read moreOverseas In-house lawyer's advice covered by legal advice privilege
There is no additional requirement for in-house foreign lawyers to be "appropriately qualified" or recognised or regulated as a "professional lawyer" for legal advice privilege to extend to communications between them and company employees.
Read moreThe Quincecare duty bowls out HSBC
The High Court has held that banks may be liable for breaches of the Quincecare duty even where the customer's net assets have not been reduced by the breach; Stanford International Bank Ltd v HSBC Bank Plc(1)
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 moreSecurity for costs not ordered despite looming economic downturn caused by COVID-19
Evidence of the adverse impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the Claimant's financial position was not enough to show an inability to pay adverse costs in a recent application for security for costs in the High Court in International Pipeline Products Limited v IK UK Ltd & Ors. [2020] EWHC 1602
Read moreStick to the process – a further reminder of how useful a process agent clause can be, especially following Brexit
Process agent clauses are commonly included in cross-border finance transactions. They avoid the need for the claimant, typically the lender, to have to serve process outside the jurisdiction, frequently a costly and time-consuming exercise, particularly when the court's permission is needed. Accordingly, lenders will often require a foreign borrower and/or any guarantors to appoint a process agent in the lender's jurisdiction to accept service on their behalf.
Read moreNo interim injunction over bitcoin account where damages would be adequate
The court has declined to continue interim injunctions granted in respect of a 'coin depot account' holding bitcoin over which the claimants asserted a proprietary right.
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 morePrivy Council gives a lesson on the remoteness of damage in contract law within a judgment on damages for breach of separate but related contracts
Where parties have entered into separate but related contracts, breach of one contract does not necessarily preclude the recovery of damages under another.
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 – Refusal to regrant injunction that lapsed during general adjournment successfully appealed
In a previous update dated 29 April 2020, we noted that a first instance court held that the general adjourned period (GAP), during which the Hong Kong courts were closed save for urgent and essential court business, did not generally extend the duration of an injunction which was granted on an urgent basis before the GAP commenced and listed for a "return date" during the GAP (for further details, see "General adjournment in Hong Kong does not extend duration of ex parte injunction", dated 29 April 2020).
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 moreSupreme Court reflects on a narrower interpretation of "reflective loss"
The Supreme Court has scaled back the scope of the reflective loss principle which has been expanded over the years. The reflective loss principle essentially prevents a shareholder from bringing a claim against a wrongdoer for the diminution in value of its shares or distributions that results from a loss caused by that wrongdoer to the company itself.
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 moreOrders for pre-action disclosure – exceptional in a commercial context?
Although parties are expected to exchange key documents before starting proceedings in the English court, a recent decision in the Commercial Court highlights the limited nature of those obligations, particularly in a commercial context.
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 moreWaiving goodbye to privilege – reliance is key
In what circumstances will a party waive privilege over legal advice by referring to it in evidence?
Read morePrivileged but admissible? When can without prejudice material be pleaded in statements of case?
The High Court considered the scope of the existing exceptions to the Without Prejudice Rule in its recent decision of Berkeley Square Holding & others v Lancer Property Asset Management & others(1). This well-known rule protects communications made in a genuine attempt to settle an existing dispute from later deployment in court. The Court allowed passages from papers prepared for a mediation to be admitted into the proceedings under two exceptions to the Without Prejudice Rule.
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 moreMinority shareholder oppression and the proper plaintiff rule – it gets personal
Section 216 of the Companies Act (Cap. 50) affords protection for minority shareholders where their interests are oppressed by the manner in which the company’s affairs are being conducted or by how the directors’ powers are being exercised.
Read moreThe commission omission? English High Court balances text and context in contractual interpretation
English law's flexible, rational, yet stable approach to contractual interpretation has been demonstrated again in Clark Street Associates v Norsk Titanium(1), a decision concerning commission payments.
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 moreTo perform or not to perform? When tendering performance means actual performance
A consultant was alleged to be in material breach of a consultancy contract for refusing to supply his services. He responded to a notice of material breach by stating that he was willing to perform. However, the Court of Appeal held that this was insufficient to remedy the breach (Bains v Arunvill Capital Limited and others)(1).
Read moreWhen will reference to a document in a witness statement waive privilege in that document
Tread carefully when considering whether and how to reference privileged documents; "deployment" of a document may draw back the cloak of privilege but a "mere reference" may not. Context will be key.
Read moreWhat are good grounds for appeal in insolvency applications?
Applying for permission to advance fresh evidence on appeal is a tricky application, which has had varying degrees of success in the courts. Zheng Yougxiong v Gate Ventures Plc(1) is a useful example of the application of the criteria, albeit in the context of insolvency proceedings.
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 moreLitigation in the time of Coronavirus (Hong Kong - Update)
The "General Adjourned Period" (GAP) during which the courts in Hong Kong have been closed, save for urgent and essential court business, has been extended to 13 April 2020.
Read moreStay connected and subscribe to our latest insights and views
Subscribe Here