Search results
121 results ordered by
The CAT's new approach: I can't afford a carriage (dispute)
Since the collective proceedings regime in the UK's Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) kicked off, a number of carriage disputes have arisen. So-called 'carriage disputes' arise when there are two or more competing proposed class representatives (PCRs) seeking certification (and therefore 'carriage') of overlapping class actions.
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digital markets regime, the requirements it will introduce, and how it may be enforced, and summarises the CMA’s new draft guidance under consultation on how it intends to implement the regime in practice.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 moreSummary judgment against persons unknown – a tale of two crypto judgments
Two recent crypto judgements in the High Court, Mooij v Persons Unknown (February 2024) and Boonyaem v Persons Unknown (December 2023) reached different conclusions regarding whether a summary judgment could be granted against unidentified (and unidentifiable) fraudsters, with Mooji deciding 'yes' and Boonyaem deciding 'no'.
Read moreSupreme Court confirms no knowing receipt claim where equitable interest is destroyed: Byers v Saudi National Bank
In Byers v Saudi National Bank, the Supreme Court affirmed the findings of the lower courts by holding that a claim for knowing receipt cannot be made if a claimant’s equitable interest in the property in question has been extinguished by the time of the defendant’s knowing receipt of the property.
Read moreMerchants Beat Venice: Court of Appeal finds that local authority of Venice did have capacity to enter into Interest Rate Swaps
In a significant judgment in Banca Intesa Sanpaolo and Dexia Credit Local SA v Comune di Venezia [2023] EWCA Civ 1482, the Court of Appeal overturned the findings of the High Court
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 moreBinance successfully challenges interim proprietary injunction over deposited cryptoassets
In Piroozzadeh v Persons Unknown and Others [2023] EWHC 1024 (Ch), the cryptocurrency exchange Binance successfully applied to discharge an interim proprietary injunction obtained by a claimant whose misappropriated cryptoassets had been deposited at the exchange. This is the first recorded case of an exchange successfully having discharged such an injunction.
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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 moreStay connected and subscribe to our latest insights and views
Subscribe Here