Search results
842 results ordered by
'Nosecco' is a no-no, says the High Court
In recent years, health and wellbeing has been big business in the UK. The COVID-19 outbreak has only further stoked the desire to obtain and maintain healthy minds and bodies and the trend looks set to continue, across the retail sector.
Read moreSilicon Valley, Signature and Credit Suisse: what do they all share(holder) in common?
In what has been termed "the biggest banking crisis since 2008", both Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) and Signature Bank have collapsed, and Credit Suisse has been rescued. Whether more banks are to follow suit is yet to be seen.
Read moreA matter of interpretation – the Supreme Court look at contractual interpretation once more
In their recent Judgment in Sara & Hossein Asset Holdings Ltd (a company incorporated in the British Virgin Islands) v Blacks Outdoor Retails Ltd [2023] UKSC 2 the Supreme Court adopted a commercially balanced interpretation of a lease; rejecting the overly textual approach of the Court of Appeal in favour of reading the relevant clause in the context of the lease as a whole.
Read moreParliamentary 'wash up' – which Bills made it through?
On 22 May 2024, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak announced that a General Election will take place on 4 July 2024. Parliament was then prorogued on 24 May 2024 which allowed a mere 2 days for 'wash up' - the process by which outstanding bills may be rushed through the parliamentary process.
Read moreCrypto damages quantification: valuation at the date of breach or date of judgment?
In Southgate v. Graham [2024] EWHC 1692 (Ch), the High Court addressed an appeal from the County Court concerning inter alia the appropriate date for assessing damages in a cryptocurrency loan dispute. Initially, the County Court determined that the damages should be based on the cryptocurrency's fiat value at the breach date. Due to the volatility of the cryptocurrency, this decision would have resulted in significantly lower fiat damages award than if the valuation were based on a later date. The High Court allowed the valuation date part of the appeal, directing a further hearing to establish the appropriate date.
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 moreComing to a bank near you? How "investment AI" could transform financial mis-selling claims
Living under a rock is probably the only way anyone might have escaped the media attention given to ChatGPT and generative AI in recent months. Beyond the (considerable) hype, this technology could have a profound impact on financial mis-selling claims where financial institutions and fund managers turn to the new technology to help them select investments and products.
Read moreFraud not "some kind of open sesame" in Privy Council appeal to set aside judgment
An appellant was unsuccessful in his bid to set aside judgment on the basis of fraud as the Board of the Privy Counsel dismissed his claim as an abuse of process (1). The appellant had failed to show "fresh evidence" of fraud as he already had all of the information he was relying on to allege fraud at the time he entered into a final settlement agreement, and had not offered an explanation of why he had not deployed this information whilst the original dispute was live.
Read moreCaught out by APP fraud? Here's the 101 of what can be done
Dan Wyatt, partner at RPC, takes a look at the best strategy for APP fraud victims and their recovery options.
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 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 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 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 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 moreCompulsory mediation in small claims: a quick guide for the busy lawyer
A new pilot scheme requiring parties in money claims valued at up to £10,000 to take part in a compulsory free one-hour mediation appointment, provided by HMCTS' Small Claims Mediation Service – before the claim can then proceed to Court if no settlement is reached.
Read moreNo bouncing back for directors
Banned! Fraudsters! – Terms used by the Insolvency Service for directors who abused the government backed loan scheme which was put in place to help businesses struggling during the pandemic.
Read moreFix up, look sharp: FRC update
What's the latest on fixed recoverable costs in professional negligence claims?
Read moreNew developments in AI may put law firms at greater risk of phishing fraud
As the computing power of Artificial Intelligence continues to grow exponentially, we consider how generative technology may expand the reach of traditional phishing frauds aimed at law firms.
Read moreYour statement or mine? Witness statements under Practice Direction 57AC
The judgment of Mr Justice Fancourt in Mackenzie v Rosenblatt Solicitors & Anor [2023] EWHC 331 (Ch) has highlighted, in no less than 36 paragraphs on the matter, the importance of ensuring compliance and understanding of Practice Direction 57AC - Trial Witness Statements in the Business and Property Courts ("PD 57AC"), when preparing witness statements.
Read moreThe collapse of FTX: lessons for many
From investors to regulators, FTX Trading Ltd (FTX) filing for bankruptcy was unexpected by all. A catalyst for litigation and regulation over the years to come, this collapse will serve as a warning, particularly to cryptocurrency insurers.
Read moreSLAPPs – a round up of the latest developments for the SRA
The last week or so has seen a burst of activity on SLAPPs, alongside criticism of the SRA. This will be of interest to lawyers and their insurers.
Read moreThe scope of a solicitor's duty to third parties in the spotlight again
The Claimant (Mr Syed Ul Haq), via his Estate, brought claims against the Defendants for damages arising out of two frauds in connection with the same property. It is central to this appeal to understand that Rees Page Solicitors never acted for the Claimant. It is indeed for that reason Rees Page Solicitors applied for summary judgment on the grounds that the Claimant had no reasonable prospects of success. After hearing the application, on 13 December 2019, Deputy Master Lloyd, granted summary judgment on the basis that as Mr Ul Haq was not a client of Rees Page Solicitors, they did not owe him a duty of care.
Read moreIs the FCA to blame for BSPS? MPs seem to think so
The House of Commons Public Accounts Committee (PAC) yesterday published a report entitled "Investigation into the British Steel Pension Scheme". The report makes a number of recommendations in light of its investigations in to the FCA's conduct and regulatory oversight at the time of the issues arising from the British Steel Pension Scheme (BSPS) and in particular the decision by 7,834 members to transfer to a personal pension arrangement. The report is heavily critical of the FCA's handling of BSPS and its regulatory oversight of the defined benefit transfer market generally. Given the request in the report for an update from the FCA on its progress on the various recommendations and conclusions in 6 months' time, we wait to see how the FCA reacts to yet further criticism of its handling of BSPS at a time when it is reviewing responses to the consumer redress scheme consultation.
Read moreFCA consultation on British Steel redress scheme published
The FCA has now published its consultation paper on the proposed redress scheme for British Steel Pension transfers under s.404 of FSMA. The scope of this is wider than anticipated and the proposals contain some surprises around the lack of an opt-in process and potential involvement of FOS.
Read moreSIPPs and FOS - does the Rowanmoor decision change anything?
Last week FOS published a decision it reached last year in a complaint against a SIPP provider involving advised sales. The FOS upheld the complaint, finding that the SIPP provider should have rejected business from the regulated financial adviser, CIB Life and Pensions Limited (CIB), given, broadly, red flags available to the SIPP provider with respect to the operation of CIB's business model including that CIB was not advising on the ultimate investment within the SIPP and as a result such introductions involved a significant risk of consumer detriment. The decision has received quite a bit of press attention - but has it moved the dial for SIPP complaints before FOS or not?
Read moreThe Future of Insolvency Regulation
On 21 December 2021 the Government launched a consultation into the future of insolvency regulation. The changes proposed in the consultation document will have a wide ranging impact on the insolvency profession (and its insurers) with the proposals including: the direct regulation of insolvency firms, the introduction of a single regulatory body with powers to order compensation against insolvency practitioners and firms, a new additional requirements regime, changes to the bond regime and a public register of insolvency practitioners and firms. Many of the changes proposed require primary legislation and so it may be some time before the changes to take effect (if adopted). But there does appear to be some wind behind these proposals given they follow on from the Call for Evidence in 2019 and a more general focus on insolvency issues in the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic.
Read moreAgainst a Backdrop of Rising Corporate Insolvencies HMRC Joint and Several Liability Notices: Should Directors be Concerned?
It is widely anticipated that the next twelve months could be a challenging period for many businesses in the UK and that there could be a significant rise in the number of companies in financial distress.
Read moreChoppy waters ahead? The significance of Oceanfill
The economic outlook for the UK in 2023 remains uncertain, and more companies may need to restructure their businesses to ensure survival. This
Read moreBTI 2014 LLC v Sequana SA and others – Supreme Court decision
The Judgment of the Supreme Court in BTI 2014 LLC v Sequana SA was handed down on 5 October 2022.
Read moreCarluccio's serves up a rescue recipe
On Friday 24 April, RPC hosted a 30 minute webinar on the interaction of furloughing and insolvency law.
Read moreCOVID-19: the supply chain
Concerns regarding the strength of UK supply chains and the consequences which arise when links in the chain fail, are not new and were recently subject to significant scrutiny in the context of Brexit negotiations. But with COVID-19 causing a host of new problems for already stressed supply chains, what can businesses do to protect themselves?
Read moreCOVID-19: Good news on wrongful trading provisions but why should directors tread carefully?
The Government has launched a number of initiatives to assist companies and businesses to trade through the current financial stress. But what should directors still be aware of as they steer their organisations through these unprecedented times?
Read moreCOVID-19: The suspension of wrongful trading provisions and a moratorium for businesses in restructuring – what is the likely impact on your business?
COVID-19: On 28 March 2020 the Business Secretary announced further new far-reaching measures to help businesses combat the financial impact of COVID-19. What it the likely impact of the suspension of wrongful trading provisions and a moratorium for businesses in restructuring on your business?
Read moreMcDonald's BIG MAC trade mark – General Court gives decision on evidence of genuine use
In a decision that, practically, provides for only a tiny loss of protection for the behemoth brand and trade mark, on 5 June 2024 the European General Court (General Court) partially revoked McDonald's BIG MAC trade mark (the EUTM) in the EU (Supermac's (Holdings) Ltd v EUIPO (Case T 58/23)).
Read moreSupreme Court dismisses Amazon's appeal in landmark decision on consumer targeting
In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court has dismissed Amazon's appeal against a Court of Appeal (CoA) decision, which found that the sale of branded goods on Amazon's US site, amazon.com, infringed UK and EU trade marks by virtue of the fact that UK consumers had been targeted.
Read moreBenchmarkalikes – Aldi's Taurus cloudy cider lemon leaves Thatchers Cider with a headache
In a recently dismissed claim for trade mark infringement and passing off brought by Thatchers Cider we see so called lookalike or "copycat" products continue to provide a major headache for brands. It's the latest in a line of cases showing that the answer to issues arising from supermarkets' "inspired" alternatives, increasingly is rarely found in trade mark or passing off rights.
Read moreThe status of parallel trade in the European Union and the UK
The following article is a collaboration between Jani Ihalainen of RPC and PDGB (Virginie Coursière-Pluntz and Benjamin Jacob), RPC's partner firm in France through its TerraLex network.
Read moreGinfringement: Success for M&S in the Court of Appeal in registered design spat with Aldi
M&S and Aldi's gin bottle battle over design rights has reached a conclusion (for now) as the Court of Appeal has unanimously upheld the IPEC's decision that Aldi's bottle infringed M&S' design.
Read moreClear as gin: M&S and Aldi take liquor bottle battle to the Court of Appeal
Intellectual property enthusiasts' favourite supermarket adversaries were back at loggerheads this week as M&S and Aldi appear before the Court of Appeal. The pair sought to thrash out a first instance decision handed down in the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (IPEC) regarding alleged infringement of M&S' registered design rights in a gin bottle.
Read moreThaler v Comptroller [2023] UKSC 49: the UKSC rules that AI cannot be an 'inventor'
To the surprise of no one, the UK Supreme Court (UKSC) has finally ruled that an artificial intelligence (AI) cannot be an inventor for the purposes of UK patent law. This judgment accords with the decisions of the lower courts in the UK and the initial ruling of the UKIPO. It also reflects similar findings from most of courts around the world where the claimant, Dr Thaler, brought similar actions.
Read moreGenerative AI and intellectual property rights—the UK government's position
The IPO is to produce a code of practice by the summer that will provide guidance to support AI firms in accessing copyright protected works as an input to their models.
Read moreM&S v Aldi – lookalike claims lit up by design rights
As lookalike products rise in prominence, the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court's (IPEC) recent ruling that the sale and advertisement of Aldi's 'Infusionist' range of favoured gins infringed M&S's UK registered designs protecting the light-up bottles containing its 'Snow Globe' gin range (Marks and Spencer PLC v Aldi Stores Limited [2023] EWHC 178) highlights the utility of registered design rights in circumstances where other intellectual property rights (IPR) are often less able to provide protection.
Read moreLookalikes and passing off—bottle design get-up claim (Au Vodka)
Currently there's significant activity in the lookalikes space. The Au Vodka claim (Au Vodka v NE10 Vodka [2022] EWHC 2371), which focuses on bottle design 'get-up', arrived in the courts for an interim injunction hearing in September 2022. Au Vodka's application was dismissed. The judgment shows that passing off—get-up claims based on shape can be challenging to bring, particularly at the interim stage, and prompts the question of whether it's possible to bring Cofemel and copyright into the lookalikes arena.
Read moreStay connected and subscribe to our latest insights and views
Subscribe Here