Tue12122017

Last updateTue, 24 Feb 2015 5pm

The Commercial Litigation Journal: July/August 2015

Matthew Collingwood-Cooper examines a recent judgment of note for parties to adjudication

On 17 June 2015 the Supreme Court gave judgment in the case of Aspect Contracts (Asbestos) Ltd v Higgins Construction plc [2015].

Julianne Hughes-Jennett and Sarah Baddeley look at the implications of Gazprom

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has handed down its judgment in Gazprom OAO v Republic of Lithuania [2015] confirming that the Brussels I Regulation (Reg 44/2001), which governs the jurisdiction of member state courts over civil and commercial matters, is not applicable to an award issued by an arbitral tribunal prohibiting proceedings in the court of another EU member state (a so-called anti-suit injunction). Instead, anti-suit injunctions issued by arbitral tribunals are governed by national and international law including, where applicable, the New York Convention.

Ince & Co

Jonathan Elvey and Despina Plomaritu consider the recent decision in Braganza

Contracts often give you free rein to take a decision about something. English law curbs that freedom – by requiring you to act in good faith and reasonably. Braganza v BP Shipping Ltd [2015] looks again at how you decide what is reasonable. The ruling of the Supreme Court indicates a tougher attitude.

RPC

Davina Given and Ed Holmes report on recent developments in the Court of Appeal

In Trust Risk Group SpA v AmTrust Europe Ltd [2015] the Court of Appeal has rowed back from the presumption that parties who have agreed differing jurisdiction arrangements intended their disputes to be governed by one regime.

Sarah Breckenridge analyses the current state of costs management

In May 2015 at the annual Harbour Lecture, Jackson LJ ‘confronted’ costs management with a survey of major themes and issues which have emerged since its introduction.

Neil Jamieson and Paul Mesquitta outline the perils involved in changing experts

As practitioners will know, the rules governing the use of experts in court proceedings are contained in Part 35 of the CPR. Specifically, CPR 35.4 states:

John Doherty and Nicole Finlayson review the battle against corruption

Bribery and corruption are a scourge on society, threatening democracy and fairness, damaging institutions and hampering economic development and growth. Given the cross-border reach of many offences, the fight against bribery and corruption is a global one and relies on cooperation between countries and strong bribery and corruption laws across the world.

Clare Arthurs and Julie Bond provide a timely reminder of the rules relating to litigants in person

Swingeing cuts to legal aid; vastly increased court fees; an increased small claims limit; the ‘unbundling’ of legal services… No wonder most courts and tribunals are dealing with increasing numbers of parties who are unrepresented for some or all of the court process. Litigants in person (LiPs) create challenges for the judiciary and the legal professions alike. To quote the Master of the Rolls, the main challenge for our justice system is ‘to make sure that everyone is treated equally, fairly and impartially and according to the law’.