This category can only be viewed by members.

Search orders: Seek and ye shall find

Stewart Hey, Rhys Novak and Simon Heatley discover new depths in search orders ‘Search orders by their nature are preservatory and the question of the use of preserved material must be raised specifically with the court.’ A search order is perceived to be one of the most, if not the most, draconian orders the court …
This post is only available to members.

Regulation: Funny money

Keith Oliver, Amy Harvey and Amalia Neenan assess the impact of regulation and civil remedies on crypto-criminality ‘It remains to be seen how these new regulatory efforts will play out in the future, and whether they will have any meaningful impact on curtailing the rapidly increasing level of cryptofraud in the UK.’ 2019 was a …
This post is only available to members.

Limitation: The need for speed

Andrew Ward, Pierre Welch and Leah Alpren-Waterman track time limits in rail franchise public procurement claims ‘If an unsuccessful bidder in a public procurement process is to be free to challenge the lawfulness of the process while it is ongoing, and to undo the result where appropriate, then it is vital that such challenges are …
This post is only available to members.

Jurisdiction: A poultry dispute

David Sawtell discusses a free range in the choice of jurisdiction ‘When conducting the enquiry under Art 4(1), the court should carry out an objective assessment of all the factors characterising the contractual relationship and determine which of those factors are the most significant.’ Not all commercial agreements between international parties will expressly state the …
This post is only available to members.

FUNDING: Hats off

Michael Taylor, Gawain Moore, Duncan Lole and Gwendoline Davies weigh up a Court of Appeal decision on the adverse costs liability of litigation funders It is possible to imagine circumstances in which application of the Arkin cap might not be considered “just”, even where a funder has funded only a distinct part of a claimants …
This post is only available to members.

Practice: Your serve

Robert Danvers reports on dispensing with service ‘The court’s acknowledgement of the unconventional methods of service in Lonestar, which included Flickr, LinkedIn, and Facebook Messenger, will evince arguments for the adoption of more technologically sophisticated methods of communication in court proceedings.’ Service of the claim form triggers the court’s jurisdiction and from this date, the …
This post is only available to members.

Defamation: Out of harm’s way

Hannah Kent discusses defamation claims ‘It is important to bear in mind a claimant company’s particular circumstances. A particular statement may cause greater or lesser financial loss to a company, depending on their circumstances and the reaction of those to whom it is published.’ A claimant cannot have an actionable defamation claim unless the allegedly …
This post is only available to members.

Contract: Give it back

Lynsey Oakdene and Claire Acklam review recent case law on restitution ‘Proceeding to do business without a comprehensive written contract, and ultimately having to rely on a restitutionary remedy, can prove a false economy.’ Quantum meruit is a principle of natural justice which, in the absence of any other (contractual, tortious or statutory) cause of …
This post is only available to members.

Cryptoassets: Contracts Jim, but not as we know them

Jeremy Richmond and Christopher Recker boldly explore the status of cryptoassets and smart contracts ‘The significance and potential applications for smart contracts are diverse; in the construction industry it is thought that smart contracts could be implemented to simplify greatly and automate the payment of contractual obligations.’ In November 2019 the UK Jurisdiction Taskforce (UKJT) …
This post is only available to members.

Costs: Triumph(ant)?

Giles Tagg and Zak Mehmood report on a recent costs judgment ‘Primus argued that a proportional costs order would be appropriate, submitting that Triumph brought forward three claims, one of which was unreasonably brought and led to identifiable, substantial and severable costs.’ The recent case of Triumph Controls UK Ltd v Primus International Holding Co …
This post is only available to members.