May/June 2019 #85 – Law Journals

Enforcement: Follow the money

Thomas Williams, Anna Booth and Michael Lee report on a ground-breaking enforcement of a UK judgment in India ‘While the Code offered a new and (at that point) untested route to enforce a debt owed and evidenced by a foreign judgment, Stanbic opted to follow that procedure rather than enforce its foreign judgment directly.’ Victory …

Continue reading "Enforcement: Follow the money"

This post is only available to members.

Injunctions: Nohow or contrariwise?

Ekaterina Pakerova peers down the rabbit hole to consider ownership and control in freezing injunctions ‘Even if the respondent was the sole shareholder this cannot be taken to mean that they own or are in any way entitled to the company’s assets.’ In Alice in Wonderland, the Cheshire Cat famously disappears leaving only its smile. …

Continue reading "Injunctions: Nohow or contrariwise?"

This post is only available to members.

Practice: When is the law not the law?

David Cook seeks certainty from the Supreme Court ‘Conventional wisdom and common practice over time had effectively distilled Lord Dunedin’s Dunlop tests into an unhelpful, over-simplified distinction.’ It sounds like the beginning of a bad joke, but it is no laughing matter that a recent run of Supreme Court cases serve to demonstrate that conventional …

Continue reading "Practice: When is the law not the law?"

This post is only available to members.

Arbitration: Unappealing decisions

Michael Bennett blows the dust off arbitral appeals on a point of law ‘In many ways the legal position on appeals relating to points of law has come full circle. Following the 1698 Act the (eventually) settled position was that appeals would only be allowed where the error was apparent on the face of the …

Continue reading "Arbitration: Unappealing decisions"

This post is only available to members.

Insights by Penningtons Manches: Does the Arkin cap still fit?

Clare Arthurs and Nicole Finlayson advise dedicated followers of fashion ‘Commercial litigation funders have enjoyed pairing their NPCOs with a jaunty Arkin cap. ChapelGate described this finishing touch to its adverse costs outfits as a principle which limited its total liability to the defendants to the overall maximum of the funding that it provided to …

Continue reading "Insights by Penningtons Manches: Does the Arkin cap still fit?"

This post is only available to members.

Implied terms: Grief in Greendale

S T

Kate Raybould highlights the woes of the Post Office ‘The claimants argued that liability for losses was limited to losses caused by their own default or negligence, whereas the Post Office maintained that liability was effectively strict for any losses, howsoever caused.’ Although it may not be immediately apparent when you pop in for a …

Continue reading "Implied terms: Grief in Greendale"

This post is only available to members.

Limitation: The stroke of midnight – from writs to rags

Andrew Archer counts every second of a recent decision on limitation ‘Matthew concerned the defendant trustees’ alleged failure to claim under a court-sanctioned scheme of arrangement by the “Bar Date” of 2 June 2011.’ For both Cinderella and the parties in Matthew v Sedman [2019], the clock striking midnight was a make-or-break moment. Matthew is …

Continue reading "Limitation: The stroke of midnight – from writs to rags"

This post is only available to members.

Jurisdiction: Sizeable submissions

Richard Swan looks at the implications of a recent Supreme Court judgment ‘In modern litigation it is increasingly common for jurisdictional challenges and their associated arguments, tests and preliminary issues to turn into mini trials.’ The Supreme Court has criticised litigants for the way in which jurisdictional challenges are being conducted. Handing down judgment in …

Continue reading "Jurisdiction: Sizeable submissions"

This post is only available to members.