James Stuart represents Michelin-star chef in contractual disputeDaily Mail article 11/03
11th March 2019 by James StuartCommercial Property: Toms v Ruberry  EWCA Civ 128This is an important commercial property case, holding that, a notice under section 146(1) of the Law of Property Act 1925 (“a notice”) can not be given until the landlord’s right of re-entry has accrued under the provisions of a lease.
26th February 2019 by Dominic BrightCommercial: Spi North Limited v Swiss Post International (UK) Ltd and Asendia UK Ltd  EWCA Civ 7 – no duty on corporate defendant to make ‘reasonable enquiries’ before putting claimant to proofWhen a defendant is unable to admit or deny an allegation in the particulars of claim, is it required to make reasonable enquiries of third parties before pleading the same under CPR, r16.5(1)(b)?
28th January 2019 by David SawtellCommercial: Drones, Airprox, and the Regulatory Environment: Cause for Concern?After Britain’s busiest airport grounded flights for almost an hour in response to a suspected drone sighting (“the Heathrow shutdown”), it was fairly reported that: ‘The latest incident will raise further concerns about why detection and blocking devices...
28th January 2019 by Dominic BrightCommercial: ILLEGALITY: fraudulent claimant entitled to damages from negligent solicitorsDid the claimant’s participation in a mortgage fraud prevent her recovering damages for professional negligence from her conveyancing solicitors?
10th October 2018 by Winston JacobCommercial: Mitchelled? Should a solicitor withdraw from acting?...In Garbutt -v- Edwards  1 WLR 2907 the Court of Appeal rejected the submission that failure to provide
10th October 2018 by Richard PowerCommercial: ABUSE OF PROCESS: claim in deceit permitted following unsuccessful claim in negligenceWas it an abuse of process to bring a claim in deceit following an unsuccessful claim in negligence?
10th October 2018 by Winston JacobCommercial: Joint Tortfeasorship in IPR claims – Still a “Grenade” in the Tail for Directors?In a decision handed down in 2016 – Grenade (UK) Ltd. Grenade Energy Ltd. & another  EWHC 877 (IPEC) – HHJ Hacon considered the position of the directors in ‘one-man’ companies...
10th October 2018 by Dr Tim SampsonCOMPANY LAW: The limits of the rule against reflective lossDoes the rule against reflective loss apply to claims by unsecured creditors who are not shareholders of the relevant company?
1st August 2018 by Winston JacobAdministratorsAdministration is an alternative to liquidation, for which legislation is now contained in Schedule B1 to the Insolvency Act 1986.
1st August 2018 by Graeme KirkCIVIL PROCEDURE: Application by non-party to set aside judgment under CPR 40.9Are individual directors or shareholders of a company entitled to apply under CPR 40.9 to set aside a judgment against the company?
27th June 2018 by Winston JacobA big welcome to Matthew GillettCommercial and Chancery; Property; Personal Injury; and Aviation and Travel
4th June 2018 by Mark RowlandsTwo Third Six Pupillages commencing in personal injury and commercial/property groups.Invitation for applications. Deadline: 16 July 2018
29th May 2018 by Philip AldenDiana Loson appeals the Court of Appeal judgment to the United Kingdom Supreme CourtLoson v Brett Stack & Anor  EWCA Civ 803; Times, April 26, 2018
2nd May 2018 by Arfan KhanCommercial: Forget me, forget me not, forget me!NT1 & NT2  EWHC 799 (QB)
1st May 2018 by Elizabeth DwomohCommercial: Morris-Garner v One Step (Support) Ltd  UKSC 20The Supreme Court has re-cast the law on negotiating damages, otherwise styled ‘Wrotham Park damages’.
1st May 2018 by David SawtellBankruptcy: What happens where a petition debt does not meet the conditions for bankruptcy by the point of the hearing?April 2018 has seen a number of valuable insolvency decisions delivered by the High Court and Court of Appeal (“CoA”), one of which being the decision in Loson v Stack & Anr  EWCA Civ 803.
1st May 2018 by Hannah LaithwaiteNew Practice Direction on Insolvency ProceedingsOn 25 April 2018, a new Insolvency Practice Direction was made by order of the Chancellor of the High Court with the approval of the Lord Chancellor.
26th April 2018 by Winston JacobLondon Paris Bar Exchange AssociationHosted by Lamb Chambers
6th April 2018 by Barbara ZeitlerCommercial: Persmimmon Homes v Ove Arup The end of the Contra Proferentem Rule?
27th February 2018 by Adam SwirskyCivil Procedure: Mind your orders!Mrs. Francois v Barclays Bank Plc  EWHC 3531 (QB)
27th February 2018 by Elizabeth DwomohCivil Procedure: Limitation when cause of action accrues at midnightWhen a cause of action accrues during the course of a day, that day is disregarded for limitation purposes.
27th February 2018 by David WillinkCommercial: Derivative actions and other ways of resolving disputes within small companiesIf a director damages his company fraudulently, negligently or otherwise, the company can of course sue him.
27th February 2018 by Richard ColbeyUpper Tribunal Judicial Review appeals test overturned: Nwankwo v Secretary of State for the Home Department  EWCA Civ 5The Applicants appealed a decision of the Upper Tribunal refusing to grant permission to appeal a costs decision made in judicial review proceedings.
15th January 2018 by Mark RowlandsSUPREME COURT JUDGMENT: BENKHARBOUCHE (Respondent) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Appellant) and Secretary of State for Foreign and......Commonwealth Affairs and Libya (Appellants) v Janah (Respondents)
20th October 2017 by Philip AldenCourt of Appeal decides missed connection flight delay appeal in passengers’ favourOn 12 October 2017, the Court of Appeal handed down its judgment in the joined appeals of Gahan v Emirates and Buckley v Emirates  EWCA Civ 1530.
16th October 2017 by John DitchburnJacobs UK Limited v Skanska Construction Limited  EWHC 2395 (TCC) Is it unreasonable and oppressive for a party to withdraw an adjudication referral – and then seek to adjudicate the same or subThe claim that came before Mrs Justice O’Farrell DBE in Jacobs UK Ltd v Skanska Construction Ltd concerned a party’s right to commence an adjudication, withdraw it...
13th October 2017 by Tim SampsonNHS Commissioning Board v Silovsky  EWCA Civ 1389The Court of Appeal was again faced with a question of contractual interpretation where a close textual analysis appeared to provide an unusual commercial outcome.
13th October 2017 by David SawtellTechnomed Ltd. v Bluecrest Health Screening Ltd & Express Diagnostic Ltd. t/a Cardio Analytics  EWHC 2142The High Court judgment in Technomed v Bluecrest Health Screening is interesting and important for two reasons – ...
25th September 2017 by Dr Tim SampsonChen v Ng (British Virgin Islands)  UKPC 27 - The importance of putting matters to witnessesNg Man-Sun (“Mr Ng”) and Chen Mei Huan (“Madam Chen”), who were living together, were the directors of Peckson, a BVI company. The appeal concerned the ownership shares in Peckson (“the Shares”).
25th September 2017 by Matthew Winn-SmithThe Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Foundation Trust v ATOS IT Services UK Limited  EWHC 2197 (TCC)O’Farrell J in the TCC dealt with the effect of an exclusion clause on a claim based on reliance losses. ATOS provided medical records software that the Trust argued suffered from performance issues.
25th September 2017 by David SawtellMT HØJGAARD A/S (Respondent) v E.ON CLIMATE & RENEWABLES UK ROBIN RIGG EAST LIMITED and Another (APPELLANTS) –  UKSC 59At the beginning of August the Supreme Court handed down its judgment in MT HØJGAARD A/S (‘MTH’) v E.ON – reversing the decision of the Court of Appeal and reinstating the first instance order of Edwards-Stuart J.
1st September 2017 by Dr Tim SampsonBank of Ireland (UK) Plc v Watts Group Plc  EWHC 1667 (TCC)Mr Justice Coulson was asked to considered the duty of care of a quantity surveyor providing a report to a bank as part of its lending decision.
27th July 2017 by David SawtellDavid Sawtell published in the Trusts and Estates Law & Tax Journal on constructive trusts over propertyDavid Sawtell’s article, ‘Constructive trusts: more than words?’ has been published in the July/August 2017 edition of the Trusts and Estates Law & Tax Journal.
5th July 2017 by PhilCivil Procedure: Is service of a claim form and the particulars of claim a reserved legal activity and one which can be delegated to an agent by a litigant in person?In Ndole Assets v Designer M&E Services UK Ltd  EWHC 1148 (TCC) the claimant company was a litigant in person in proceedings brought against the defendant company.
1st June 2017 by Elizabeth DwomohRecycling a Claim Against One Tortfeasor After Settlement with AnotherWhat happens in a case involving multiple Defendants when one of those Defendants is not party to a settlement between the Claimant and one or more of the other Defendants?
1st June 2017 by Joanna KerrCommercial: One word answer? Limiting the adjudicator’s jurisdiction – AECOM Design Build Limited v Staptina Engineering Services Limited  EWHC 723 (TCC)In this case the TCC re-visited the question of the extent of the adjudicator’s jurisdiction when deciding a dispute arising from a construction dispute.
1st June 2017 by David SawtellNew Insolvency Rules from 6 April 2017The Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016 came into effect this month, replacing the Insolvency Rules 1986. The rules have been restructured, consolidated and modernised, with the intention of delivering efficiency savings through deregulation. The following is a brief round-up of some of the key features.
26th April 2017 by John DitchburnFinancing property loans: the Brexit perspectiveWith current Brexit and indeed global developments, the markets are displaying considerable volatility and there are potential profits to be made by acting quickly.
5th April 2017 by PhilFinancing property loans: the Brexit perspectiveWith current Brexit and indeed global developments, the markets are displaying considerable volatility and there are potential profits to be made by acting quickly.
5th April 2017 by Vincent DenhamCosts budgeting vs detailed assessment – Merrix v Heart of England NHSFT  EWHC 346 (QB)Where the Court has set a costs budget, can a successful party expect to recover the costs set out in that budget? Following the decision in Merrix, the answer seems to be yes – unless there is a good reason to depart from it
22nd March 2017 by Ross BeatonConference on interim orders in international commercial litigation - 17th March - LondonLamb Chambers Barristers Clive Blackwood and David Sawtell will be giving a day-long conference entitled ‘A Guide to Interim Orders in International Commercial Litigation’ for MBL Seminars this Friday 17th March 2017.
16th March 2017 by Clive Blackwood & David SawtellSeminar: “How I learned to stop worrying and love Article 50” Book now >Whatever your personal feelings about Article 50, it will at least initiate the negotiation process that will clarify the UK’s future relationship with the EU.
13th March 2017 by Vincent DenhamCOMBAR Talk : Financial Services after BrexitAnalysis of the legal consequences of Brexit in the context of the UK financial services sector.
13th March 2017 by Vincent DenhamBrexit – what rights have we really acquired?When the UK joined the EU, British people got some new rights – for instance, to live and work in other member states – which they had never had before. British businesses gained new rights too, providing goods and services without being impeded by tariffs or measures of similar effect.
9th March 2017 by Ross BeatonGenuinely Self-Employed or Worker? Another Court Decision on the Gig EconomyIn Pimlico Plumbers and Charlie Mullins v Gary Smith  EWCA Civ 51 (10 February 2017) the Court of Appeal upheld an Employment Tribunal decision that a plumber was a worker, rather than self-employed, thereby entitling him to pursue disability discrimination claims and claims for holiday pay and unauthorised deduction from wages.
17th February 2017 by Barbara ZeitlerA reminder not to conflate the question of contract formation with the task of contractual interpretationContract disputes invariably turn on well-rehearsed principles of interpretation summarised neatly in Arnold v Britton  UKSC 36, following Lord Hoffman’s restatement of the governing principles in Investors Compensation Scheme Ltd v West Bromwich Building Society  UKHL 28.
17th February 2017 by Hannah LaithwaiteBrexit – what does it mean for the City?The UK’s financial services sector generates around 7% of GDP, pays about £60bn per year in tax, directly employs about 1.1m people, and makes a significant contribution to sustaining another million jobs in associated sectors such as accountancy, management consultancy and law.
13th February 2017 by Ross BeatonLimitation period on a counterclaim – section 35 Limitation Act 1980A party brings a claim within the limitation period, but can the defendant counterclaim, even though the limitation period for their own claim expired before the claimant’s claim was issued? In Al-Rawas v Hassan Khan & Co (a firm)  EWCA Civ 42, the Court of Appeal considered the effect of s. 35 of the Limitation Act 1980 on the limitation period of an original set off or counterclaim and ruled that the answer to the question was “no”.
7th February 2017 by Winston JacobCommercial Bar Association – The Brexit PapersA series of papers on the effect of Brexit on many areas of commercial practice
30th January 2017 by Vincent DenhamBarbara Zeitler will give a talk - ‘Le BREXIT : quelles consequences politiques et juridiques au Royaume-Uni ?’Rendez-vous d’Europe 2017 - Rennes
20th January 2017 by Vincent DenhamEnterprise Act 2016Part 5 of the Enterprise Act 2016, which comes into force on 4 May 2017 seeks to deal with an oddity in English law the effect of which has been that an insured has no claim in damages against his insurer for the consequences of late payment of his claim. Possibly the best reported consequence of this rule comes from Sprung v Royal Insurance  Lloyd’s Rep I.R. 111.
21st December 2016 by Napier MilesSDT rebuked for incorrect approach to an Appeal but the SRA has no power to restrict the engagement of consultants by SolicitorsSolicitors Regulation Authority v Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal & Huseyin Arslan (Interested party) & Law Society (Intervening party)  EWHC 2862 (Admin)
21st December 2016 by Dr Joanna KerrAirbnb users’ accident: gig economy back in the spotlightIt seems that the legal implications of the so-called gig economy could be tested again, just a month after the Employment Tribunal considered that Uber,...
8th December 2016 by Graeme KirkCourt of Appeal Allows Appeal in Yadly MarketingArfan Khan was instructed as lead Counsel and led on the appeal. The appeal was allowed. The case is reported as Yadly Marketing v Secretary of State for the Home Department  WLR (D) 621;  EWCA Civ 1143.
29th November 2016 by Arfan KhanUlterior motives and discretion in bankruptcy proceedingsIn Maud v Aabar Block SARL and another  EWHC 2175 (Ch) the High Court considered the correct approach to exercising discretion in a bankruptcy petition where there was an ulterior object to the petitioners’ bringing of the petition which was also opposed by other creditors.
22nd November 2016 by William SkjøttAslam and Farrar and others v Uber BV, Uber London Ltd and Uber Britannia LtdOn 28 October 2016 the Employment Tribunal ruled on the status of Uber drivers and concluded that they were workers and entitled to be paid the minimum wage and annual leave.
22nd November 2016 by James TunleyCourt of Appeal confirms Costs Liability of Unsuccessful FundersIn Excalibur Ventures LLC v Texas Keystone Inc & Others  EWCA Civ 1144 the claimant had entered into a conditional fee agreement with its solicitors and obtained third party funding in order to pursue its claim.
22nd November 2016 by Bernard PressmanRead David Willink’s article on the emerging proposals to spend £700m on the transformation of the civil courts through IT.Lamb Chambers barrister David Willink was first involved in developing the e-business strategy for the courts in England and Wales sixteen years ago, when the Government set a target for all public services to be online by 2005!
7th November 2016 by Vincent DenhamIncreasing judicial tendency to protect ‘without prejudice’ communicationsIn September 2016, Chief Master Marsh found that the privilege attaching to without prejudice communications extends to interlocutory hearings.
4th November 2016 by John DitchburnArticle 50 High Court ruling finds against the GovernmentThe Lord Chief Justice handed down the judgment of the Divisional Court today in the case of Miller v Secretary of State for Exiting the EU.
3rd November 2016 by Alex CunliffeNew Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016 to overhaul insolvency procedureNew insolvency rules come into effect on April 6th 2017 which will replace the procedural framework contained in Insolvency Rules 1986 (as amended) for the Insolvency Act 1986.
31st October 2016 by Hannah LaithwaiteHeathrow Third Runway: is the UK construction industry ready to take off?The news that a third runway has been approved for Heathrow has triggered renewed debate about the merits of the scheme and at least one West London by-election.
27th October 2016 by David SawtellBernard Pressman discusses the effect of the late filing of a defenceA decision which appears to have gone under the radar at the Chancery Division recently is that of Ian Billington v Davies  EWHC 1919 (CH). This could be because it is a decision of a Deputy Master, though is still technically binding on a Judge sitting in the County Court.
26th October 2016 by Bernard PressmanCommercial: Is A Click Ever Enough?Around Week Two of our law courses, we learned that guarantees must be in writing. This had an air of exoticism because it dated back to 1677 and an Act so old that it was a ‘Statute’; the Statute of Frauds.
20th October 2016 by Graeme KirkCommercial: Fraudulent claims and collateral lies – the Supreme Court draws the lineThe “fraudulent claims rule” bars the whole of a policyholder’s claim where it is either wholly invented or fraudulently exaggerated.
20th October 2016 by David WillinkAviation: The High Court affirms itself as sole gatekeeper for disclosure of air accident investigation recordsThe High Court has handed down two judgments in which it had cause to grapple with both the interpretation and application of the robust protective disclosure regime under the Civil Aviation (Investigation of Air Accidents and Incidents) Regulations 1996/2798, Reg.18.
12th October 2016 by Hannah LaithwaiteNew High Court guidance for considering bankruptcy orders where an ‘ulterior object’ is identifiedA three-stage consideration - the High Court has clarified the approach required when a court is faced with a bankruptcy petition, an alleged ulterior object and opposition to the petition by other creditors.
11th October 2016 by Hannah LaithwaiteAlex Cunliffe obtains High Court orders to prevent the dissipation of proceeds from a major fraudActing for a leading business finance provider, Lamb Chambers Member Alex Cunliffe has obtained a series of freezing and disclosure orders to prevent the dissipation of proceeds from a major fraud.
6th October 2016 by Alex CunliffeImportant changes to civil appeals under CPR Part 52On 3 October 2016, a new CPR Part 52 was substituted for the existing version (Civil Procedure (Amendment No. 3) Rules 2016, rule 10 and the Schedule).
5th October 2016 by Winston JacobUsing computer technology to assist e-disclosure…Using computer technology to assist with e-disclosure has always promised to reduce time and cost. For some years, computer software has been available to assist with the review process and now finally it is making an appearance in the UK.
4th October 2016 by David SawtellAlton Towers Smiler crash shows the legal importance of facility managementFollowing the £5 million fine imposed on Merlin Attractions Operation Limited for Health & Safety failings in the Smiler crash, David Sawtell discusses the legal importance of facility management and the lessons that should be learnt from the case.
3rd October 2016 by David SawtellWhat happens when the pound in your client’s pocket is devalued?Currency fluctuations in transactions
9th September 2016 by David SawtellSettlement: an air of finality – Commercial Litigation Journal: July / August 2016David Sawtell writes about the latest developments in the law on commercial compromise agreement in this month’s Commercial Litigation Journal.
1st September 2016 by David SawtellIllegality re-explained and Tinsley v Milligan overruled by Supreme CourtThe doctrine of illegality has been criticised for its complexity and incoherency. In Patel v Mirza  UKSC 42 the Supreme Court delivered welcome guidance as to the scope and application of the doctrine.
31st August 2016 by Richard HayesCourt of Appeal grants permission to appeal in second appealInsolvency – Bankruptcy- defrayment of judgment debt – nature of legal test – second appeal – stay of execution
26th August 2016 by Arfan KhanArfan Khan Leads Appeal in the Court of AppealArfan Khan leads appeal of general public importance in the Court of Appeal
Statutory limitation periods – principle and practice
19th August 2016 by Arfan Khan“Fraudulent claims rule” does not extend to “fraudulent devices”Supreme Court hands down judgment in Verloot Dredging  UKSC
11th August 2016 by Richard HayesHas the Supreme Court opened the floodgates to a torrent of satellite litigation?An Important Question Answered
22nd July 2016 by Richard HayesJ Murphy and Sons Ltd v W Maher and Sons Ltd  EWHC 1148 (TCC)The jurisdiction of an adjudicator to hear a dispute about a settlement agreement arising from a construction claim is not clear cut.
14th July 2016 by David SawtellBank's High Court Claim for £9.5 million Settles Out of CourtArfan Khan successfully defended complex claims in the High Court Chancery Division.
4th July 2016 by Arfan KhanCourt of Appeal Grants Permission to Appeal in Default Judgement CaseDefault judgment – Practice and Procedure
20th June 2016 by Arfan KhanChancery Litigation in Construction DisputePeak Construction (London) Ltd v Savva & Anor  EWHC 1295 (Ch)
16th June 2016 by Arfan KhanMerlin’s facility management: why commercial and property lawyers will need to know about BIMThe way in which the built environment is constructed and facilities are managed is changing. We need to make sure our contracts, enquiries and legal services keep up.
7th June 2016 by David Sawtell“Who dunnit?” – Cooper and another v Thameside Construction Company Ltd (in administration)  EWHC 1248 (TCC)The case of Cooper and another v Thameside Construction Company Ltd (in administration) (2016) EWHC 1248 (TCC) is a reminder that in a competing theories case claimants must diligently gather and test all...
6th June 2016 by Elizabeth DwomohNobahar-Cookson & Ors v The Hut Group Limited  EWCA Civ 128The Court of Appeal confirmed that, where necessary, exclusion clauses should be construed narrowly to resolve ambiguity.
6th May 2016 by William SkjøttWrotham Park damages for breach of contractIn Wrotham Park, the claimant was awarded damages following the defendant’s breach of a restrictive covenant by building a housing development.
6th May 2016 by Richard HayesInjunctions: holding the balance – Procurement and Outsourcing Journal: May / June 2016David Sawtell explores the latest case law on the American Cyanamid guidelines when applying for an interim injunction in this month’s Procurement and Outsourcing Journal.
6th May 2016 by David SawtellHills v Niksun  EWCA Civ 115On 1 March 2016 the Court of Appeal gave judgment in Hills v Niksun  EWCA Civ 115. Mr Hills, the Respondent represented by Matthew Winn-Smith, was successful in resisting the appeal.
4th April 2016 by Matthew Winn-SmithC&S Associates UK Limited v Enterprise Insurance Company PLC  EWHC 3757The High Court has clarified issues concerning the variation, and termination of contracts – in particular: (1) termination on grounds not initially cited by the terminating party; and (2) variation by the exchange of e-mails.
23rd March 2016 by Rahul VarmaBrown & Brown v Complete Building Solutions Ltd  EWCA Civ 1The Court of Appeal recently handed down two important decisions that looked at the question of the effective scope of the limitation on “re-adjudications” ....
23rd March 2016 by Dr Tim SampsonNew tenant - David SawtellWe are delighted to welcome David Sawtell to Chambers today.
9th March 2016 by Vincent DenhamNew Rules on Cost BudgetingAs of the 6th of April 2016, important new rules affecting costs budgeting come into force.
4th March 2016 by Bernard PressmanEffecting personal service of a bankruptcy petitionIn Morby v Gate Gourmet Luxembourg IV Sarl and another  EWHC 74 (Ch), the High Court has helpfully clarified the mechanism by which personal service of a bankruptcy petition can be effected when a debtor is not handed the petition or attempts to evade service.
11th February 2016 by Elizabeth DwomohThe perils of late amendmentsIn Rahan Ali v Abu Bakar Siddique  EWCA Civ 1258 the Court of Appeal reminded us of the perils of very late amendments.
11th February 2016 by Bernard PressmanThe “proper purpose” ruleOn 2 December 2015, the Supreme Court gave judgment in Eclairs Group Ltd v JKX Oil & Gas plc and Glengary Overseas Ltd v JKX Oil & Gas plc  UKSC 71.
11th February 2016 by Matthew Winn-SmithImplied terms in contractsOn 2 December 2015, the Supreme Court gave judgment in Marks and Spencer v BNP Paribas  UKSC 72.
18th December 2015 by Winston JacobLimitation in a professional negligence context: Chinnock v Wasbrough  EWCA Civ 441S.14A(9) Limitation Act 1980 provides that knowledge of whether or not any acts (or omissions) amount to negligence is irrelevant for limitation purposes.
18th December 2015 by Jane CliftonLand Division of the Law of LimitationWebsite address
2nd December 2015 by Mark West2015: A good year for contract law?The direction of travel in commercial contract law has been towards freedom of contract and upholding the actual bargains reached by the parties, says Richard Hayes - www.solicitorsjournal.com
1st December 2015 by Richard HayesNot so secret agent - New Law Journal 16.10.2015New Law Journal, 16 October 2015
16th October 2015 by Winston JacobChaplair Limited v Kumari  EWCA Civ 798Can contractual costs usually recoverable under CPR 44.5 still be recovered when a case has been allocated to the small claims track (‘SCT’)?
1st October 2015 by Vaughan JacobImplementation of the EU Payment Accounts Directive in the UK (2014/92/EU)The Payment Accounts Directive (“PAD”) was adopted by the European Commission (“EC”) on 8 May 2013 and subsequently, in revised form, adopted by the European Parliament and Council on 23 July 2014.
1st October 2015 by Oliver HyamsFlanagan v Liontrust Investment Partners LLP and OthersJudicial decisions relating to Limited Liability Partnerships (“LLPs”) have been relatively rare since their statutory invention by the Limited Liability Partnerships Act 2000. Like London buses, two have now come along at once: the judgments of Warren J.
1st August 2015 by Clive BlackwoodSolicitors’ agents: rights of audience and the Chambers’ advocateIn what circumstances does a “solicitors’ agent” enjoy a right of audience before a court? The answer is likely to be increasingly important, as challenges to solicitors’ agents’ rights of audience appear to be on the rise.
1st August 2015 by Winston JacobThe Consumer Contracts (Information Cancellation, and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013These Regulations come into force on the 13 June 2014 and whilst they might sound innocent enough they will have very wide ranging impact on various commercial transactions.
1st May 2015 by Plevin v Paragon Personal Finance Limited  UKSC 61In this case concerning payment protection insurance (‘PPI’) the Supreme Court has provided guidance on what gives rise to an “unfair relationship” under s.140A – C of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (‘the Act’).
1st December 2014 by Vaughan JacobRobertson v Swift  UKSC 5018 months after the Court of Appeal handed down judgment partially in favour of Dr Robertson, the Supreme Court perfected his success by finding entirely in his favour in this small claim.
1st October 2014 by Helen TurnbullUnfair relationships under the Consumer Credit Act 1974When assessing the issues of “unfair relationships” and deemed agency under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (“the Act”), the Court of Appeal has once again robustly decided in favour of the debtor.
1st July 2014 by Elizabeth DwomohRelief from sanctions – Denton v TH White Ltd  EWCA Civ 906Winston Jacob examines the latest Court of Appeal decision on relief from sanctions
1st July 2014 by Winston JacobDunhill v Burgin  UKSC 18In this case the SC considered whether a consent order ought to be set aside if C lacked capacity at the time it was made.
1st June 2014 by Philippa SealProcedure: – A more robust approach?Has the Court of Appeal already forgotten the new “more robust” approach to applications for relief from sanctions introduced in Mitchell and reinforced in Durrant?
1st March 2014 by Winston JacobProcedure: Relief from sanctionsAny defaulting party who had lost all hope since Mitchell  EWCA Civ 1537 may take some comfort from Lakatamia Shipping Co Ltd v Nobu Su & Ors
1st March 2014 by Philippa SealInsurance – Coles v Hetherton  EWCA Civ 1704The Court of Appeal has upheld the decision of Cooke J ( EWHC 1599 (Comm) – see August 2012 Round-Up) and with it the repair arrangements of Royal & Sun Alliance (“RSA”). The key elements of the CA’s conclusions can be summarised as follows.
1st February 2014 by Winston JacobCPR 3.9 – relief from sanctionsIn Durrant v Chief Constable of Avon & Somerset Constabulary  EWCA Civ 1624 the Court of Appeal gave its second decision on the new CPR 3.9.
1st February 2014 by Winston JacobCPR 3.9 – Relief from sanctionsThe CA has given its first decision on the correct approach to the new version of CPR 3.9 in Andrew Mitchell MP v News Group Newspapers Ltd  EWCA Civ 1537.
1st December 2013 by Winston JacobThe Lawyer’s Remembrancer 2013 Limitation of Action, Misrepresentation and Sale of Goods and Services sections, ISBN 97801-84766-930-8, Bloomsbury Professional Limited 2012,Vaughan is a contributor
7th November 2013 by Vaughan JacobAction for priceDoes section 49 of the Sale of Goods Act 1979 set out the only circumstances in which a seller of goods can maintain an action for the price?
1st November 2013 by Winston JacobCredit hire: Cancellation of Contracts Made in a Consumer’s Home or Place of Work etc. Regulations 2008Chen Wei v Cambridge Power and Light Ltd (unreported). In the latest credit hire judgment, HHJ Moloney held that the credit hire agreement in this case was unenforceable under the Regulations.
1st June 2013 by Matthew Winn-SmithExclusion of contractual liability - Kudos Catering (UK) Ltd v Manchester Central Convention Complex Ltd  EWCA Civ 38The Respondent (“Manchester”) appointed the Appellant (“Kudos”) its exclusive supplier of catering services for a 5 year period. Midway through the agreement Manchester purported to terminate. Kudos alleged repudiatory breach and claimed £1.3 million loss of profits.
1st March 2013 by Winston JacobA warning for those bringing large claims for hire: Hardip Singh v Rashed Yaqubi  EWCA Civ 23Following a collision the appellant’s vehicle, valued at around £250,000, required repairs. The vehicle was owned by a business partnership and formed part of a fleet of luxury cars covered on the same insurance policy.
1st February 2013 by Civil Procedure: Less Leniency for Litigants in PersonLitigants in person are frequently afforded leniency in litigation. In the context of applications pursuant to CPR 39.3 and 13.3 there is a growing body of case law. One of the newest additions to this corpus is Tinkler v. Elliott  EWCA Civ 1289.
1st November 2012 by Matthew Winn-SmithInsurance: Coles v Hetheron  EWHC 1599The Commercial Court (Cooke J) has decided two preliminary issues in a test case concerning the legitimacy of RSA's repair arrangements following negligently caused damage to its insured's vehicles.
1st August 2012 by Winston JacobCivil Procedure: Court’s power to vary or revoke orders under CPR r 3.1(7)CPR r. 3.1(7) provides: “A power of the court under these Rules to make an order includes a power to vary or revoke the order.”
1st June 2012 by Winston JacobBusiness Common Sense: Rainy Sky SA & Ors v Kookmin Bank  UKSC 50R were the buyers of six ships to be built by J. R were to pay by a series of instalments as the build progressed. It was a condition precedent to payment of the first instalment that J would deliver refund guarantees from a bank (“K”) in a form satisfactory to R’s financiers.
1st June 2012 by Richard HayesDirectors' liability and misrepresentation: Roder (UK) Ltd v. Titan Marquees Ltd & Ors  All ER (D) 93Does the Statute of Frauds 1677 and Statute of Frauds Amendment Act 1828 afford a defence to the director who has promised his supplier that “the cheque is in the post”?
1st March 2012 by Harrison v Black Horse  EWCA Civ 1128The Court of Appeal judgment was handed down on 12th October 2011 in this case which arose from the sale of policies of payment protection insurance (“PPI”). In 2003 and 2006 the Harrisons took loans from the Defendant together with policies of PPI.
1st December 2011 by Arbitration: New ICC Rules releasedThe new ICC Rules of Arbitration have been circulated. They have been three years in the making and come into effect on 1 January 2012. The last revision was in 1998 so it is not surprising that there are many changes. Most seek to speed up and thereby reduce the costs of the process.
1st October 2011 by Costs: C v D  EWCA Civ 646C makes an offer to D headed "offer to settle under CPR Part 36". C includes that the offer will be "open for 21 days" from the date of the letter and also the costs' consequences of not accepting the offer within this "relevant period".
1st July 2011 by Philippa SealCan a company harass its customers?The administrative court has recently answered the question as to whether or not a company can harass its customers or, indeed, anyone else.
1st June 2011 by Adam SwirskyExperts: Jones v Kaney  UKSC 13The Supreme Court abolished immunity from suit in negligence of expert witnesses in relation to their participation in legal proceedings.
1st May 2011 by Winston JacobMirror Group newspapers Limited v United Kingdom (Application No.39401/04) The Times, January 20, 2011, ECtHRThe Conditional Fee Agreements Order 2000 Art.4 allowed the use of a Conditional Fee Agreement (“CFA”) in all litigation except criminal, environmental and certain family proceedings. The maximum success fee was also fixed at 100%.
1st March 2011 by Vaughan JacobCourt of Appeal upholds contractual estoppelSpringwell Navigation Corporation v. JP Morgan Chase & Others  EWCA Civ 1221. The Court of Appeal ended 11 years of litigation with its recent decision in Springwell.
1st December 2010 by Rahul Varma