Latest by Alan Williams
Privy Council decides that banks owe no Quincecare duty to a beneficial owner of monies in an account
A bank does not owe the beneficial owner of account monies any duty of care in negligence, including any Quincecare duty: this was the conclusion of the Privy Council in the Isle of Man case Royal Bank of Scotland International Ltd v JP SPC4 and another. The appeal concerned a fraud where the account holder had defrauded the beneficial owner of the monies, an investment fund, by paying funds out of the relevant bank accounts in contravention of a legitimate investment scheme.
Read moreCommercial Court confirms limits of full and frank disclosure duty in arbitration enforcement action
What happens when a party makes a without notice application? How far should it go to meet its obligation of full and frank disclosure? The Commercial Court gave clear guidance on the limits of this duty when it dismissed the latest claim by the State of Libya that challenged General Dynamic's permission to enforce an arbitral award in General Dynamics United Kingdom Ltd v State of Libya.(1) This was one in a series of cases between the company and the North African country.
Read moreCourt of Appeal draws distinction between claims for recovery of tax and restitution for tax paid out fraudulently
In Skatteforvaltningen v Solo Capital Partners,(1) the Court of Appeal investigated in detail the operation of rule 3(1) of Dicey, Morris & Collins on the Conflict of Laws (edition 15) (Dicey rule 3), which provides that English courts do not have jurisdiction over actions for "the enforcement, either directly or indirectly, of a penal, revenue, or other public law of a foreign State". The Court decided that the Danish tax authority's claim did not fall within Dicey rule 3 as it concerned the restitution of monies misappropriated by fraud rather than enforcement of tax.
Read moreThe current state of service
Civil war, competing Governments and a dangerous environment. None of these factors ultimately swayed the UK Supreme Court on 25 June, which held that an English court cannot simply dispense with service of the claim form in proceedings against a State, however difficult service may seem.
Read moreHidden owners, ostensible authority and the Duomatic principle
The Duomatic principle can apply to ostensible authority as well as actual authority, according to the Privy Council in Ciban Management Corporation v Citco (BVI) Ltd & Anor (British Virgin Islands) [2020] UKPC 21.
Read moreQuasi-proprietary claims: use of disputed funds to pay legal costs
In Kea Investments Ltd v Eric John Watson, the High Court considered to what extent a defendant should be permitted to use funds subject to a freezing injunction to fund its legal expenses where the claimant advances a quasi-proprietary claim over those funds
Read moreSubjective expectation versus objective intention; when will a term be implied into a contract?
The High Court has implied a term into a contract for the sale of Peruvian Government Global Depository Notes (GDNs) by Lehman Brothers International (Europe), in order to make the contract workable.
Read moreCourt of Appeal makes rare order for rectification, with interesting consequences…
The Court of Appeal has ordered rectification resulting in one party being in breach of warranty and liable pay damages. In Persimmon Homes Limited v Hillier and Creed [2019] EWCA Civ 800, the dispute centred on whether all plots of land required to create a development site were intended by both parties to be included in a sale, when in fact two plots out of six were not included.
Read moreSection 1782 order allowed
The Commercial Court recently discharged an injunction restraining the enforcement of a US court order made under Section 1782 of Title 28 of the US Code (Assistance to foreign and international tribunals and to litigants before such tribunals). Section 1782 applications can be a useful weapon in an English litigator's armoury as a means of obtaining evidence under the control of a US-based entity through US-style discovery, including by the use of depositions and documentary evidence.
Read moreBreaking news – a victory for privilege
Today the Court of Appeal handed down its eagerly anticipated judgment in the appeal of Andrews J's controversial High Court decision in Serious Fraud Office v Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation.
Read moreFund management litigation
Recourse for LP investors when an investment goes wrong
Read moreLetters of Credit: Fraud conquers all – if it is fraud
The High Court decision in Petrosaudi Oil Services (Venezuela) Ltd v. Novo Banco S.A. and Others [2016] EWHC 2456 provided a useful reminder that the principle of autonomy, which provides for payments to be made under letters of credit, regardless of disputes under the underlying contract, will not be upheld if the fraud exception applies. In its decision at first instance the High Court had found that the fraud exception had applied. However, the High Court judgment was appealed. This update discusses the Court of Appeal's decision.
Read morePension Deed rectified by Summary Judgment without a hearing
The High Court has recently granted summary judgment for rectification of a trust deed without a hearing. The judge did this "in such plain circumstances" where the evidence demonstrated that there was "no real prospect of a realistic challenge" to the position that the final version of the deed should have been executed, not an earlier draft.
Read moreDon't gamble on a wager
In WW Property Investments v Natwest one of many interest rate swaps claims that have been made since the global financial crisis, the High Court confirmed, in line with previous decisions, that interest rate hedging agreements are not wagers in law where at least one party entered into the contract for a genuine commercial purpose and not to speculate.
Read moreTime lost may never be found again
The decision in Medhi Khosravi v British American Tobacco plc [2016] EWHC 123 (QB) provides a useful reminder that it can be a risky strategy to seek extensions of time for service of a claim which has already been issued. Such extensions should not be granted lightly, and might be set aside at a later date.
Read moreTracing Mr Maluf's millions
The recent Privy Council decision in Federal Republic of Brazil and another v Durant International Corporation and another upholding a Jersey Court of Appeal judgment provides guidance on the approach the English Courts may now take to backwards tracing.
Read moreNo way out: a recent Supreme Court decision re-states the principles of contractual interpretation and provides a salutary reminder that the English Courts are wary of re-writing "bad bargains"
The Supreme Court's decision in Arnold v Britton provides a salutary reminder of the reluctance of the English Courts to re-write "bad bargains" even if they have catastrophic unforeseen commercial outcomes for one of the contracting parties.
Read moreGood Russian Service
Following the decision in Sloutsker v Romanova[1], it should now be more difficult for parties to evade the effective service of English court documents in Russia.
Read moreTurning the clock back
A recent Court of Appeal decision[1] in a pensions' dispute provides a reminder of circumstances in which the English courts will allow a statement of case to be amended to bring a new claim which would otherwise be time barred.
Read moreInterim decision in SFO's battle with Tchenguiz brothers
"They wanted to get some scalps …. And now I'm going to butcher them"
Read moreThe Financial Crisis - Where are we now?
"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers" was the cry that famously went up in a peasant's revolt dramatised by Shakespeare centuries ago.
Read moreActing in Good Faith – is this now a given under English Law?
Under many civil law jurisdictions, such as France, Germany, and Italy, the law of obligations recognises and enforces an overriding principle (derived originally from Roman law) that in making and carrying out contracts parties should act in good faith.
Read moreA recent High Court decision acts as a reminder to take care in seeking to settle disputes
The recent decision by the English High Court in Newbury v Sun Microsystems [2013] EWHC 2180 (QB) underlines the importance for lawyers of taking care when settling disputes.
Read more