January/February 2013 #47 – Law Journals

Arbitration: Who pays the piper?

Sayuri Ganesarajah focuses on the judgment in Jivraj v Hashwani An arbitrator is neither an employee nor self-employed, but an ‘independent provider of services’, who is a ‘quasi-judicial adjudicator’. According to the International Arbitration Survey 2012 conducted by the School of International Arbitration at Queen Mary University, London is the most preferred and widely-used seat …

Continue reading "Arbitration: Who pays the piper?"

This post is only available to members.

Company: Share and share alike?

Alex Fox and Clare Arthurs explore the court’s approach to unfair prejudice claims It is not enough to establish prejudicial conduct; the conduct must also be ‘unfairly’ prejudicial. The court’s power to provide remedies for shareholders in respect of the way in which a company’s affairs are conducted stems entirely from statute, residing now in …

Continue reading "Company: Share and share alike?"

This post is only available to members.

Part 36: The devil’s in the detail

Matthew Evans examines recent case law on the technical requirements of Part 36 Part 36 of the Civil Procedure Rules offers parties valuable costs protection, and can put pressure on them to settle. The recent Court of Appeal case of F&C Alternative Investments (Holdings) Ltd v Barthelemy [2012] is a reminder that parties need to …

Continue reading "Part 36: The devil’s in the detail"

This post is only available to members.

Privilege: The demise of the doodle

Simon Readhead QC provides a cautionary warning for the inattentive Do you doodle in meetings? Should you doodle in meetings? There is both good news and bad. The good news is that doodling may be good for you! A study by the University of Plymouth and published in Applied Cognitive Psychology suggests that doodling actually …

Continue reading "Privilege: The demise of the doodle"

This post is only available to members.

Contract: Hedging your bets

Andrew Savage and Andrew Waters consider the recent Court of Appeal decision in Standard Chartered Bank v Ceylon Petroleum Corporation Moore-Bick LJ’s judgment gives helpful guidance on the question of whether a transaction is hedging or speculation. The Court of Appeal’s decision in Standard Chartered Bank v Ceylon Petroleum Corporation [2012] is the latest in …

Continue reading "Contract: Hedging your bets"

This post is only available to members.

Insolvency: Universalism? Not in my back yard

Chris Webber looks at recent case law on the recognition of foreign insolvency proceedings Universalism has never become an overarching guiding principle to be applied in novel or marginal cases.The UK Supreme Court’s recent decision in Rubin v Eurofinance SA [2012] has halted the march towards (modified) universal recognition of all aspects of foreign insolvency …

Continue reading "Insolvency: Universalism? Not in my back yard"

This post is only available to members.

Damages: A slice of the cake

Nick Rowles-Davies assesses the impact of the draft Damages-Based Agreement Regulations There is some force in the argument that acting under a DBA pushes the solicitors closer to being a funder and ‘the real party’ to the proceedings. The Civil Justice Council’s (CJC) working party on damages-based agreements (DBAs) has prompted some debate in the …

Continue reading "Damages: A slice of the cake"

This post is only available to members.

Contempt Of Court: All bark and no bite?

Andrew Keltie, Henry Garfield and Andrew Matheson review recent case law on contempt Allegations of contempt often require the applicant to prove to the criminal standard of proof that an individual has lied or deliberately misled the court. The Court of Appeal recently had some damning words for Kazakh businessman Mukhtar Ablyazov in his unsuccessful …

Continue reading "Contempt Of Court: All bark and no bite?"

This post is only available to members.

Norwich Pharmacal: Kicked into touch (again)

K &

Louise Millington-Roberts reports on the final hearing in The Rugby Football Union v Viagogo The Supreme Court has found that the data privacy rights of the wrongdoer can be overridden where there is a greater good to protect. Regular readers may recall my report ‘Converting a Try’, CLJ42, March/April 2012, p8 on The Rugby Football …

Continue reading "Norwich Pharmacal: Kicked into touch (again)"

This post is only available to members.