Latest by Davina Given
Risky business: the perils of taking over someone else's contract
The High Court has held that the tort of inducing breach of contract requires more than merely "facilitating" a breach. Flexidig Ltd v A Coupland (Surfacing) Ltd(1) also reminds third parties of the perils of becoming embroiled in others' disputes.
Read moreHigh Court waits for no lawyer
An appeal was recently lost after an application for an oral hearing was made just two days late. Evans v Pinsent Mason LLP [2019] EWHC 2150 (QB) This decision is a timely reminder of the strictness of court deadlines and of the importance of being upfront with the court (and your opponent) which, on this occasion, was unwilling to forgive ambiguity as to whether the deadline had been met.
Read moreClarity, clarity, clarity; more contract drafting lessons from the court
Keep under review options for terminating contracts which are no longer needed or pay the price. We discuss an interesting approach from the High Court to the well-known principles of contractual interpretation in Macquarie Capital v Nordsee. [2019] EWHC 1655 (Comm)
Read moreThe Art of the (Settlement) Deal
According to the English Court of Appeal, giving up a right which the debtor does not even know he has is sufficient consideration for settling a debt. But the vexed question of what amounts to "good" consideration remains uncertain enough for those entering into a contract always to consider whether good consideration has been given. If in doubt, pay a nominal amount.[1]
Read moreServing up the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
The Court has reminded us that the duty of full and frank disclosure applies to any application made without notice to the other party. Although this is most typically an issue in applications for injunctions, permission to serve a claim out of the jurisdiction was recently set aside on the grounds of the claimant's failure to disclose to the Court a potential limitation defence to the claim.(1)
Read moreDisclosure Pilot Scheme: Cooperation and culture
Partners Parham Kouchikali and Davina Given discuss the Disclosure Pilot Scheme and the change in cooperation and culture needed for the pilot to be successful for all parties involved.
Read moreThe High Court removes its cap for litigation funders
The High Court has declined to cap a litigation funder's liability for adverse costs at the amount of funding provided. It confirmed that the so-called Arkin cap is an approach to be considered, not a rule to be followed (Davey v Money [2019] EWHC 997 (Ch)).
Read moreWhat if third parties helped to hide the golden egg?
What if third parties helped to hide the golden egg?
Read moreThe fraudster is insolvent – can you add more eggs to the basket?
The fraudster is insolvent – can you add more eggs to the basket?
Read moreWhat to do if the golden egg hatches (or you need to trace into the fraudster's other assets)
What to do if the golden egg hatches (or you need to trace into the fraudster's other assets)
Read moreHow can I find the golden egg? Part 2: ask the Easter bunny (or third parties)
How can I find the golden egg? Part 2: ask the Easter bunny (or third parties)
Read moreHow can I find the golden egg? Part 1: ask the fraudster and accept no eggs-cuses
How do I find the golden egg? Part 1: ask the fraudster and accept no eggs-cuses
Read moreHow do you stop the treasure map leading to the golden egg being destroyed?
How do you stop the treasure map leading to the golden egg being destroyed?
Read moreHow do you stop the golden egg rolling away?
How do you stop the golden egg rolling away?
Read moreThe greatest Easter egg hunt: asset recovery in the English courts
The greatest Easter egg hunt: asset recovery in the English courts
Read moreEnglish Court trumps the FBI
In HP's high profile claim against Mike Lynch in relation to its acquisition of Autonomy, the English High Court has held that the implied undertaking against collateral use of documents received in the course of litigation prevented disclosure of those documents to the FBI.
Read moreTime waits for know-ledge: but what does that mean for limitation?
Keep limitation under review, Section 14A does not extend the limitation period until each and every breach is identified and a claimant cannot postpone the date of 'knowledge' under Section 14A of the Limitation Act by choosing which breach of duty it relies on.
Read moreWatch out! Internal settlement negotiations may not always remain "internal"
WH Holding Limited (1) West Ham United Football Club Limited (2) v E20 Stadium LLP [2018] EWCA Civ 2652 finds that internal settlement negotiations are not protected by litigation privilege.
Read moreOn the twelfth day of Christmas, the High Court gave to me…twelve judges judging
It attracted nothing like the controversy of the US Senate's confirmation of US Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh. However, the decision of the two selection commissions to recommend, and of the Lord Chancellor to recommend to the Prime Minister, the appointment of Lady Hale to the Presidency of the UK Supreme Court and of Ladies Black and Arden to the Court marked historic firsts in 2018.
Read moreOn the eleventh day of Christmas, the High Court gave to me…eleven groups a-growing
Unlike Scrooge, litigation will not wake transformed on Christmas Day into a gentler, kinder activity. But it is undergoing a slower transformation with the growth of various forms of group litigation in England.
Read moreOn the tenth day of Christmas, the High Court gave to me…ten claims a-noticed
Christmas may come but once a year, but 2018 was book-ended by two cases in the Court of Appeal on claim notices in the context of share sale purchases.
Read moreOn the ninth day of Christmas, the High Court gave to me…nine losses mounting
It's rare for cases on damages to reach the Supreme Court, and there was just one in 2018: Morris-Garner v One Step (Support) Ltd (possibly particularly appropriate for a verse normally taken up with possibly aged leaping lords).
Read moreOn the eighth day of Christmas, the High Court gave to me…eight duties owing
To borrow from a distinctly non-Christmassy text: to owe or not to owe a duty? That is often the difficult question. (It could be worse: o-ho-ho-ho-we, yes, it could.) By way of a round-robin letter on the topic, by and large, 2018 was a good year for.
Read moreOn the seventh day of Christmas, the High Court gave to me…seven fraudsters fleeing
A Home Office report in July 2018 found that in 2015/16 there were 3.6m incidents of fraud with an immediate cost of £3.04bn and 2m incidents of cybercrime with an immediate cost of £526m. It seems improbable that the number or value of those incidents has declined since then, and certainly fraud of all types has had a busy 12 months in the English courts.
Read moreOn the sixth day of Christmas, the High Court gave to me…six exclusion clauses
Geese, which normally feature in this verse, can pack a nasty bite. In a gaggle of cases this year, exclusion clauses bit claimants hard – but in two cases the claimants successfully fought back.
Read moreOn the fifth day of Christmas, the High Court gave to me…five time bars!
A defendant who can rely on a limitation defence strikes gold. However, the extreme impact of a time bar in wiping out a claim, however meritorious, combined with the impenetrability of some parts of the Limitation Act 1980, makes limitation a fertile source of dispute, and so it proved in 2018.
Read moreOn the fourth day of Christmas, the High Court gave to me…four contracts
Questions of contractual interpretation can be hard nuts to crack. We pick out today some nuts that you might find at the bottom of your legal stocking this year.
Read moreOn the third day of Christmas, the High Court gave to me…three corporate crimes
Beware of employees bearing gifts of frankincense, myrrh and especially gold: 2018 saw the first conviction after a contested prosecution for the corporate offence of failing to prevent bribery, under s7 of the Bribery Act 2010.
Read moreOn the second day of Christmas, the High Court gave to me…two LIBOR reps
The long-running and hard-fought saga of Property Alliance Group v Royal Bank of Scotland came to a close with the Court of Appeal's judgement in March 2018, after four and a half years and at least 12 reported decisions. So what will we remember from the litigation?
Read moreOn the first day of Christmas, the High Court gave to me…a privilege in E-N-RC
With Advent upon us, and Christmas on the horizon, RPC takes a musical look back at the most important English judgments of 2018. Liability for all failures of rhythm and rhyme is hereby excluded.
Read moreAnti-money laundering legislation meets the art market
The art market is often described as the last unregulated market. Even if that is true, it is set to change in the next couple of years, with the market being brought firmly within the ambit of European Union anti-money laundering legislation.
Read moreReflections on the UK Bribery Act seven years on
Following the appearance of RPC's Sam Tate at the annual IBA conference earlier this month, where he joined a panel of experts discussing Corruption and Corrupt Contracts, here are our reflections on how the Bribery Act has changed the landscape of bribery offences and corporate criminal liability, first published by the IBA earlier this year and now updated.
Read moreOil or nothing: Court of Appeal considers damages in continuing misrepresentation claim
The Court of Appeal recently held that a director who had made continuing fraudulent misrepresentations was liable for damages calculated at the point of sale and not at the point of entering into the contract. This judgment is a reminder that, in the right case, deceit may be used to pierce the corporate veil. It also highlights the considerations when assessing damages regarding continuing representations, particularly when there is time between the representation being made and the performance of the contract.
Read moreRelief for Skilled Persons as the Court of Appeal rules they are not amenable to judicial review
In what circumstances might skilled persons appointed under FSMA be subject to judicial review? The Court of Appeal recently explored the vulnerability of skilled persons to judicial review and dismissed an application for judicial review against KPMG, acting as a skilled person on behalf of Barclays Bank, as it found the framework in which KPMG operated was not sufficient to bring it into the public law arena.
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 moreNon-party access to documents on court file: normal service resumes
A master's decision to allow a non-party to proceedings to access a wide range of documents in the proceedings was reviewed by the Court of Appeal in Cape Intermediate Holdings Ltd v Dring (Asbestos Victims Support Group).(1) In its judgment, the court provided helpful guidance on the principles that should be applied when deciding whether to allow such an application.
Read moreA variation on a theme of settlement
In this unusual case, the Court was asked to determine a dispute regarding the settlement of a debt alleged to be owed to the Claimant following a sale at Sotheby's of various Persian antiquities. The case will be of interest to practitioners in its examination of the circumstances in which a party is able to discharge its liability under a settlement agreement through the payment of a lesser sum than that originally agreed. The judgment also provides a valuable insight into the antiquities world, and its comments on the close community in which the parties operated are particularly pertinent for those in the art arena who are considering embarking upon litigation.
Read moreLitigation privilege: whose privilege?
The claimants, companies in the corporate group of the mining company MMG, applied to inspect certain documents created in foreign proceedings over which the defendants, companies belonging to the mining company Glencore, asserted litigation privilege.
Read morePrivilege: A welcome respite from ENRC?
Are interviews held with employees to prepare a report intended to deter a governmental authority from taking legal action privileged?
Read moreDocuments from which legal advice can be inferred – are they privileged?
The High Court considered the extent to which legal advice privilege could attach to documents which were not communications of legal advice between lawyer and client but from which privileged legal advice could be inferred and held that privilege could indeed apply to such documents. The test is whether there is a "definite and reasonable foundation" for such an inference to be made as opposed to material that would merely make the reader speculate what the legal advice was.
Read moreGhosh test overturned: dishonesty according to the standards of ordinary, reasonable and honest people
The Supreme Court has held that the test for dishonesty should be assessed only by reference to whether or not the defendant's conduct is dishonest by the objective standards of ordinary, reasonable and honest people. The Court concluded that there were convincing grounds for holding that the second limb of the longstanding Ghosh test did not correctly represent the law and that directions based upon it ought no longer to be given. The Court further stated that the assessment of dishonesty in criminal and civil proceedings should be made by reference to the same test.
Read moreThe Proceeds of Crime Act 2002: harsh but fair?
A recent case highlights the dilemma of businesses whose assets are frozen as suspected proceeds of crime.
Read moreLessons learned from Property Alliance Group v RBS
This article assesses the key aspects of the High Court's judgment and considers their implications for similar claims.
Read moreGuidance on the "cardinal rule" for implying terms
In Irish Bank Resolution Corp Ltd (In Special Liquidation) v Camden Market Holdings Corp the Court of Appeal held that a term could not be implied into an agreement because, although it was linguistically consistent, it was substantively inconsistent with the express terms. In doing so, the court shed further light on the application of the "cardinal rule" that an implied term must not contradict any of the express terms of the contract.
Read moreCultural Property (Armed Conflicts) Act 2017: what do collectors and dealers need to know?
The UK Parliament has recently passed the Cultural Property (Armed Conflicts) Act 2017. Although the provisions of the Act have not yet come into force, how will this impact collectors and dealers?
Read moreThe law of unintended consequences
Why professional indemnity insurers should closely examine losses in professional negligence claims
Read morePrior arbitral award – abuse of process?
Michael Wilson & Partners Limited v Sinclair and others [2017] EWCA Civ 3 demonstrates the interplay between arbitration and litigation, considering whether legal proceedings commenced by A against C are an abuse of the court's process where arbitration proceedings between A and B have decided the issue in question. The Court of Appeal held that a prior arbitration award can found an argument that subsequent litigation against a third party is an abuse of process, but will rarely do so. On the facts of this case, the claim was not considered to be an abuse of process.
Read moreThe long arm of the law: chasing the proceeds of (alleged) crime
The English Court has recently upheld a freezing order over the sale proceeds from shares alleged to be a Canadian company's bribes to a Chadian diplomat's wife in the US.
Read more"It's privileged" – is not enough! High Court orders a full list of each document over which a claim to privilege is asserted
The High Court held that a defendant's claim to privilege in respect of communications between employees and in-house counsel went too far. It ordered the defendant to provide a full list of each document over which the defendant asserted a claim to privilege, together with an explanation of the nature of the privileged claimed.
Read more