Last updateTue, 24 Feb 2015 5pm

James Popperwell and Nikolas Ireland examine a recent case looking at contract formation

The High Court’s recent decision in MacInnes v Gross [2017] provides a cautionary tale for those who conduct business without formal written contracts. It also provides a reminder of the law relating to contract formation, whether an intention to create legal relations has been established and the importance of certainty of key terms.

Doug Wass and Nikolas Ireland provide an update on contractual remedies

The Court of Appeal’s recent decision in Scottish Power UK plc v BP Exploration Operating Company Ltd [2016] has given guidance on the approach the court should take when considering whether a contractual remedy for a breach of contract should be interpreted as the sole remedy for that breach to the exclusion of all other common law remedies.

Rosemary Wooders looks at a recent Supreme Court decision on reinstatement and why the remedy is more commonly ordered in New Zealand than in the UK

The remedy of reinstatement is powerful: the employer must treat the employee in all respects as if they had never been dismissed (and if it fails to comply, it faces a penal award).

Tabitha Georghiou and Matthew Ramsey examine the impact of two cases on the existing tests to establish employers’ liability for acts committed by employees or other individuals

In two judgments delivered in March 2016, the Supreme Court has taken a fresh look at the law of vicarious liability. The last comprehensive survey of vicarious liability was in 2012 in the context of the abuse of children in religious institutions – the Christian Brothers litigation. In that case, the Supreme Court imposed liability in order to give the victims an effective remedy.

Mark Lawrence and Jonathan Pratt investigate recent Supreme Court guidance on break rights and implied terms

The year 2015 saw a series of landmark Supreme Court decisions on contract law. In Arnold v Britton [2015], the Supreme Court addressed the tension between ‘literal’ and ‘purposive’ approaches to the interpretation of contracts and came down on the side of giving words their natural meaning. In Cavendish Square Holding BV v El Makdessi; ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis [2015], the rules on penalty clauses were overhauled.

Three recent decisions have pushed the boundaries of who can bring discrimination claims, write Tabitha Georghiou and Matthew Ramsey

Discrimination law has traditionally been seen as a means of protecting individuals who fall into a closed list of disadvantaged groups.

Simon Nurney and Gavin Gray explore a recent decision on the question of jurisdiction

In the recent case of Erste Group Bank AG London Branch v JSC ‘VMZ Red October’ [2015], the Court of Appeal held that England was not the appropriate forum to determine what ‘was overwhelmingly a Russian case’. This article considers the main points of general interest arising from that judgment.

Jonathan Pratt and Doug Wass provide a warning on unintended settlements

In the recent case of Bieber v Teathers Ltd (in liquidation) [2014], Judge Pelling QC (sitting as a judge of the High Court) held that the parties had concluded a settlement agreement in an exchange of emails, notwithstanding the fact that the parties subsequently failed to agree the terms of a formal written settlement agreement.

Sayuri Ganesarajah focuses on the judgment in Jivraj v Hashwani

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 of arbitration. London was favoured for its impartial and neutral legal system, national arbitration laws, and encouraging track record for enforcing agreements to arbitrate and arbitral awards.

The consultation on ss31 and 32 of the Trustee Act 1925 introduces positive changes, finds Laurence Morgan

On 26 May 2011, the Law Commission (the Commission) published its Supplementary Consultation Paper on ss31 and 32 of the Trustee Act 1925. The paper was a follow-up to the Law Commission’s Intestacy and Family Provision Claims on Death (2009) Consultation Paper, no 191, published on 29 October 2009.

Jonathan Arr explores recent decisions in the area of set-off

In his classic treatise on set-off, Rory Derham notes that this area of the law is curiously under-considered despite ‘the importance that the business community does attach to the right to set cross-demands against each other’ (The Law of Set-Off (3rd ed), page xxi).