Insights & News
Search for Insights & News
- 237 results found
- All (237)
- Others (180)
- Press (35)
- Inbriefs (14)
- Press Releases (7)
- Case Studies (1)
Contract law update: Recent developments and practical tips03 May 2019
On 2 May 2019, Mark Lim, Sohrab Daneshku and Nigel Enticknap from our commercial dispute resolution practice group hosted a seminar discussing provisions that commonly feature in commercial contracts. Whilst important, these terms may enjoy limited attention during negotiations. We covered recent case law, offered tips on how to interpret key clauses and discussed how to avoid common pitfalls. Below is a summary of some of the key points.
Dispute Resolution Update - April 201924 April 2019
Welcome to our April 2019 Dispute Resolution Update which brings you news and our views on law and practice for dispute resolution. We’ve included articles on domestic disputes and international disputes, including summaries of recent cases. We have also included client guides on key aspects of dispute resolution.
The impact of protestors on retailers and how to deal with them12 April 2019
Everyone has the right to hold opinions and impart information and ideas including by peaceful assembly and association with others. These are ‘human rights’ which we all enjoy and which protect the right to protest and which may not be interfered with by a public authority. However, whilst the right to protest is enshrined in law, any protest must be lawful and balanced with the rights of others, including those at whom the protest is directed.
Harry Potter, Fracking, eco-warriors and ‘mob rule’ or freedom of expression – the Court of Appeal decides in the Ineos injunction case04 April 2019
Where is the dividing line between mob rule and lawful freedom of expression? This is one of the leading questions of the day. Should students be permitted to invite politicians with extreme views onto campus? Should a celebrated Oxford law professor be sacked for alleged homophobia? What about Brexit? Should protestors be arrested for confronting our MPs and expressing their views? And companies carrying out their lawful business – should they be allowed to do so without interference from protestors?
Andrew Wanambwa writes for Accountancy Daily: Section 2 notices raise risk level for accountants
Press18 March 2019
Professional services firms, requests for documents and Section 2 notices under Criminal Justice Act 1987 could pose a risk for accountants and auditors as illustrated in the recent Omers case at the High Court, explains Andrew Wanambwa, in an article for Accountancy Age.
Court of Appeal maintains interim springboard injunction in team moves case15 March 2019
Lewis Silkin has been successful in the Court of Appeal in resisting a challenge to the appropriateness of a springboard injunction secured in the High Court late last year. The injunction relates to ongoing legal proceedings concerning a team move and prevents a number of our client Secarma’s former employees and their new employers from competing and otherwise acting unlawfully.
Supreme Court decision on professional negligence and loss of chance: Perry v Raleys Solicitors21 February 2019
The Supreme Court has upheld the appeal of a firm of solicitors defending a professional negligence claim and helpfully reiterated well-established principles about the approach the court must take when considering the issue of causation in loss of chance cases. The decision clarifies what has to be proved in cases where the question for the court depends on what: (a) the claimant would have done (which the claimant must prove to the usual standard ‘on the balance of probabilities’); compared with (b) what others would have done (which are better assessed on a loss of chance basis).
Going out on a limb - English courts and overseas defendants: jurisdiction challenges and the “three limb” test06 February 2019
When a dispute involves a foreign party or events that took place in another jurisdiction, questions often arise as to where the dispute should be determined. The forum in which the dispute is determined can make a great deal of difference. It is therefore important for potential litigants to know where they can commence proceedings and whether they can resist claims brought against them in the “wrong” jurisdiction. In a recent case the English Court of Appeal considered the test that will apply when deciding whether to permit a claimant to sue a “foreign” defendant in this jurisdiction. This article was originally published in the Commercial Litigation Journal in the March/April edition.
The use of mediation in sports disputes25 January 2019
With sports disputes being on the increase, it is becoming more important for parties to consider using alternative means to resolve disputes instead of the more traditional route of proceeding to arbitration or court proceedings. Mediation is commonly used to resolve commercial disputes but with sports disputes, it is not used as often despite its many benefits.
Dispute Resolution Update - January 201916 January 2019
Welcome to our January 2019 Dispute Resolution Update which brings you news and our views on law and practice for dispute resolution. We’ve included articles on domestic disputes and international disputes, including summaries of recent cases. We have also included client guides on key aspects of dispute resolution.
Court of Appeal finds no litigation privilege in internal emails discussing commercial settlement of dispute09 January 2019
The Court of Appeal has allowed an appeal by West Ham football club in its application to inspect certain emails sent internally amongst board members of E20 Stadium LLP (“E20”) and between E20’s board members and stakeholders, in respect of which E20 asserted litigation privilege. The emails were created with the dominant purpose of discussing the commercial settlement of E20’s dispute with West Ham over the club’s rights to use the London Olympic Stadium when litigation was in contemplation. The Court held that litigation privilege does not extend to documents concerned with the settlement or avoidance of litigation where the documents neither: (a) seek advice or information for the purpose of conducting litigation; nor (b) reveal the nature of such advice or information.
Litigation privilege and the ‘dominant purpose’ test: ENRC decision applied07 January 2019
Did last year’s landmark Court of Appeal decision in Serious Fraud Office (“SFO”) v Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation Limited (“ENRC”) alter the application of the ‘dominant purpose’ test for litigation privilege where a document is brought into existence for multiple purposes, one of which is for use in litigation? The answer is ‘no’, according to a recent decision by the High Court. The Court confirmed the well-established principle that, for a claim to litigation privilege to succeed where a document is created for more than one purpose, litigation must be shown to be the dominant purpose on the facts.
Encouraging ADR: Civil Justice Council publishes final report19 December 2018
Back in 2016, the Civil Justice Council (“CJC”) set up an alternative dispute resolution (“ADR”) working group to review the ways in which ADR currently is encouraged and positioned within the civil justice system in England and Wales. The terms of reference included the review of existing forms of encouragement for mediation (and other forms of ADR) in civil cases in the Civil Procedure Rules, case law and the powers of the court, to consider alternative forms of encouragement and assess proposals for reform. The Working Group has now published its final report.
Disclosure Pilot Scheme already making an impact as High Court orders list of “issues for disclosure”12 December 2018
The mandatory Disclosure Pilot Scheme may not start in the Business and Property Courts of England and Wales (“BPCs”) until 1 January 2019, but it seems the courts are already taking the new rules into account. In one reported case, the High Court has ordered a separate “list of issues for disclosure”, which will have to be jointly completed by the parties as part of the new Disclosure Review Document required under the Pilot Scheme.
Lewis Silkin appointed to Crown Commercial Service wider public sector legal services panel06 December 2018
Lewis Silkin is delighted to announce its appointment to the Government’s Crown Commercial Service (CCS) Wider Public Sector Legal Services agreement (RM3788) to provide a full range of legal services to public bodies in the UK.
Economou v de Freitas defamation case: appeal dismissed28 November 2018
In what the leading judge called a case with “unusual and tragic facts”, the Court of Appeal has dismissed Alexander Economou’s appeal against the first instance decision that his defamation claims should fail.
Sohrab Daneshku writes for The Law Society Gazette: Witness statements – rip them up and start again?
Press27 November 2018
Sohrab Daneshku has written an article for The Law Society Gazette which discusses the review led by Mr Jutice Popplewell into the rules on witness statements, including whether the rules should be changed and, if so, how.
Fraser McKeating writes for Accountancy Age: Professional privilege and investigations – what do accountants need to know?
Press26 November 2018
In an article for Accountancy Age, Fraser McKeating explains how the law of privilege operates in the context of investigations.
Major overhaul to disclosure coming: are you ready?23 November 2018
Yesterday our commercial dispute resolution specialists Mark Lim and Paula Barry hosted a discussion about fundamental changes to the disclosure process that are due to come into force on 1 January 2019 as part of a two-year pilot scheme that will run in the Business & Property Courts across England and Wales.
Andrew Wanambwa writes for FT Adviser: Unexplained Wealth Orders15 November 2018
In an article for FT Adviser, Andrew Wanambwa discusses the powerful new weapon in the armoury of enforcement agencies, unexplained Wealth Orders (UWOs).