When disputes arise, they can often have far-reaching implications for the rest of a business.
Contentious issues need to be dealt with swiftly and appropriately to prevent them escalating, keeping disruption and financial impact to a minimum. Mitigating risk is just as important as robustly fighting a claim in court. There are numerous alternatives to litigation, so pursuing the right strategy is important to ensure disputes are resolved in the most effective way.
We treat problems as if they are our own, working closely and collaboratively with our clients to provide practical solutions that fit with their commercial objectives. While we have a substantial group of litigators, we are also experts in alternative dispute resolution, mediation and arbitration. In addition, we also provide risk mitigation and investigation services to help clients identify where issues might arise, and where they have in the past, to work out the causes and implement solutions.
Whether it’s handling high-profile, complex cases in the High Court and beyond, or working behind the scenes with a minimum of fuss, clients rely on our first-class insight to help them stay one step ahead.
Commercial Court confirms that Recast Brussels Regulation does not permit intra-EU anti-suit injunctions21 August 2018
The decision in Nori Holdings has reaffirmed that West Tankers remains an authoritative statement of EU law, providing welcome clarity following the introduction of the Recast Brussels Regulation and Advocate General Wathelet’s comments in Gazprom. However, whether or not the UK courts will regain the ability to grant anti-suit injunctions restraining proceedings in EU courts after the UK leaves the EU remains to be seen.
Clive Greenwood and Frances Simm write for Accountancy Age: Compulsory retirement: avoiding the partner pitfalls20 August 2018
In an article for Accountancy Age, Clive Greenwood and Frances Simm discuss the rules and processes involved when compelling an individual to retire from a business they co-own.
Tom Merrick comments for LexisNexis: Requirement for non-reliance clause to be reasonable upheld (First Tower Trustees Ltd and anor v CDS (Superstores International) Ltd)26 July 2018
Discussing the Court of Appeal decision in First Tower Trustees, Tom Merrick advises that sellers and landlords need to take extreme care in ensuring that replies to pre-contract enquiries are accurate and up to date and be alive to the potential risks in enforcing non-reliance clauses.
Legal Professional Privilege06 July 2018
This guide is intended to provide a brief overview of legal professional privilege. It also identifies some practical steps which will help to maintain privilege and concludes with a privilege “flowchart” and table of commonly used terms.
Court of Appeal upholds enforcement of Chinese arbitration award in England & Wales despite allegation of attempted fraud05 July 2018
One of the attractive features of arbitration is the ease of enforcement of arbitral awards in other jurisdictions. The New York Convention (the “Convention”) provides a regime by which an award made in one Convention state should be enforceable against any assets in any of the other Convention states around the world. A recent Court of Appeal decision shows that the English court will only exercise its power to refuse to recognise or enforce an arbitral award on public policy grounds in limited circumstances.
Boilerplate clauses - common issues and practical tips05 July 2018
Boilerplate clauses are often overlooked in commercial transactions. Sometimes they are not negotiated at all. But when things go wrong, boilerplate clauses are often central to the dispute and their interpretation can be crucial when determining rights.
Hague Convention - Obtaining Evidence In England And Wales For Use In Another Jurisdiction03 July 2018
Parties to proceedings in other jurisdictions often need access to evidence located in England and Wales. This guide explains how to obtain evidence in England and Wales for use in another jurisdiction.
Supreme Court delivers key judgment on the availability of Wrotham Park “negotiating” damages02 July 2018
The Supreme Court has considered an important question in relation to damages. In what circumstances can damages for breach of contract be assessed by reference to the sum the claimant could hypothetically have received, known as Wrotham Park damages, in return for releasing the defendant from the obligation he had failed to perform?