Insights & News

Directors held to be trustees of company property

08 March 2018

The Supreme Court has held that directors should be treated as being in possession of company property from the time of their appointment because, as fiduciary stewards they are trustees of trust property within the meaning of section 21(1)(b) of the Limitation Act 1890 (“the Act”).

This is my advice. By the way, it might be wrong!

05 March 2018

When do solicitors have to warn their client that the advice they are giving may turn out to be incorrect? The Court of Appeal has recently considered this issue.

Early Specific Disclosure Applications – factors the court will consider

22 January 2018

A decision in the Technology and Construction Court (“TCC") sheds light on the applicable test for early specific disclosure and the relevant considerations in making a successful application. Applications for early specific disclosure are relatively rare so the judgment provides helpful guidance.

English courts and overseas defendants: jurisdiction challenges and the “two-fold test”

15 January 2018

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.

Compulsory mediation?

11 January 2018

In October 2017 the Civil Justice Council (CJC) published its interim report on the future role of alternative approaches to dispute resolution (ADR). The report makes various recommendations as well as inviting responses. It follows input from a working group tasked in January 2017 to examine uptake of ADR in civil justice. The primary purpose of the report is to find ways to encourage its use.

Disclosure in English litigation: a sea change is coming

09 January 2018

English rules on disclosure (‘discovery’ in many jurisdictions) are set for a major overhaul. Draft rules were published in November 2017. Once approved by the Civil Procedure Rules Committee, the resulting draft is intended to be introduced as part of a pilot scheme lasting 2 years, potentially beginning in April 2018 and running in the Business and Property Courts. This will cover virtually all High Court litigation. It will not be optional.

Erosion of privilege – Law Society seeks to intervene

08 January 2018

The Law Society is applying to intervene in the upcoming appeal of the landmark privilege decision in Serious Fraud Office (“SFO”) v Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation Limited (“ENRC”).

Use of disclosed documents to threaten new proceedings was a breach of court rules and may amount to a contempt of court by the solicitor and client

12 December 2017

The Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) provide that using documents disclosed in existing proceedings (except for the specific purposes allowed) breach the rules. CPR 31.22 provides various exceptions to when a document disclosed in a set of proceedings may be used. Any use outside of the rules could also amount to a contempt of court. Both the client who relied on the solicitor’s advice and the solicitor may be equally vulnerable to the contempt proceedings where there is no evidence of deliberate or reckless misconduct by the solicitor.

Servicing trade mark infringement

22 June 2017

The use of a third party trade mark to provide information or describe a service being offered does not necessarily constitute trade mark infringement. Where the use of a trademark goes beyond that and creates an impression in the average consumer that the particular serviced is authorised by the trade mark owner, this will constitute an infringement.

Service of a claim form on an agent - was it valid?

22 June 2017

In a recent case the High Court considered as a preliminary issue whether a claimant had validly served a claim form on what they considered was the agent of the claimant. The rules of service require that the defendant must be served at the place within the jurisdiction where it conducts business, or where it carries on its activities and which has a real connection with the claim. Therefore the question here was whether the agent’s office was a place at which the defendant conducted its business, or where it carried on its activities?

Marathon Asset misses the jackpot again

12 April 2017

After being awarded only £2 in nominal damages in its breach of confidence case, Marathon Asset has been heavily penalised on costs after failing to accept the defendants’ Part 36 offer.

Court considers service of a defendant’s notice to force claimant to serve proceedings or discontinue a claim

14 February 2017

A recent decision not only reminds practitioners of a defendant’s ability to force a claimant to either serve proceedings or discontinue a claim by using a CPR 7.7(1) notice, but also considers for the first time the date for compliance with such a notice.

Legal advice privilege: Not as wide as you think?

08 February 2017

Who is a lawyer’s client and what type of communications are protected for the purposes of legal advice privilege have been the subject of two recent important High Court decisions. These cases make it clear that not all communications between lawyers and a client’s employees will be protected by legal advice privilege, even if the communication took place to allow legal advice to be given.

No duty of loyalty owed by directors to shareholders

26 November 2015

On 12 November 2015, in Sharp & Others v Blank & Others [2015] EWHC 3220 (Ch), Mr Justice Nugee handed down his latest judgment in litigation between the directors and shareholders of Lloyds Bank. His decision is of interest to directors and shareholders alike. It re-affirms the scope of duties owed by directors to shareholders, as well as the approach to be adopted when assessing them.