The High Court has held that proceedings were time barred where the claim form was issued in the English courts before the expiry of the applicable Greek limitation period, but was not served until after that period had expired: Pandya v Intersalonika General Insurance Company SA [2020] EWCH 273 (QB). Whether proceedings had been brought … Read more
In a recent case, the High Court has clarified the correct approach to reducing damages in order to reflect a finding of contributory negligence where there is also a contractual cap on liability: Natixis SA v Marex Financial and Access World Logistics (Singapore) Pte Ltd [2019] EWHC 3163. The defendant argued that the court should … Read more
In a recent decision, the Court of Appeal reconfirmed that the Duomatic principle can only apply where all shareholders have approved the relevant act of the company. It is not enough that a relevant individual would have approved the act had they known about it: Dickinson v NAL Realisations (Staffordshire) Ltd [2019] EWCA CIV 2146. … Read more
The Supreme Court has upheld the first successful claim for breach of the so-called Quincecare duty of care, which requires a financial institution to refrain from executing a customer’s payment mandate if (and so long as) it is “put on inquiry” that the order is an attempt to misappropriate its customer’s funds: Singularis Holdings Ltd … Read more
In an important decision for securities litigation in the UK, the High Court has dismissed a strike out application made by Tesco plc in the group litigation brought by its shareholders under section 90A Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (“FSMA”), relating to the false and misleading statements made by Tesco regarding its commercial income … Read more
The Court of Appeal has held that an action for alleged data breaches using the CPR 19.6 representative action procedure can go ahead, overturning the High Court’s decision which had refused permission to serve the proceedings on the defendant in the US: Lloyd v Google LLC [2019] EWCA Civ 1599. The decision is significant in … Read more
The Supreme Court has held that the requirement to show “serious harm” under section 1(1) of the Defamation Act 2013 not only raises the threshold of harm which must be proved but also requires its application to be determined by reference to actual facts regarding the impact of the statement and not just to the … Read more
The Court of Appeal has overturned a High Court decision to set aside a contract on the basis of lawful act duress where there was no finding of bad faith on the part of the defendant – an airline company which had used its monopoly position to exert pressure on its sales agent to enter … Read more
The Court of Appeal has held that an accountant member of a multi-disciplinary firm of solicitors was liable as an accessory for dishonestly assisting breaches of trust, overturning the High Court’s decision to the contrary: Group Seven Limited & Ors v Notable Services LLP & Ors [2019] EWCA Civ 614. The appeal turned on the question of whether … Read more
