The Financial Markets Test Case pilot scheme, which was due to end in September this year, is to be extended for a further three years. The scheme will also be expanded so that it applies to any Financial List claims which raise issues of general importance in relation to which immediately relevant authoritative English law guidance is needed. It will no longer be necessary for claims to raise issues of general importance to the financial markets specifically.
In a landmark constitutional law ruling, the Supreme Court today held (by a majority of 8 to 3) that the UK Government cannot trigger Article 50 of the Treaty on the European Union without an Act of Parliament authorising it to do so: R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the EU  UKSC 5.
The ruling confirms the victory of the claimants, who had been successful last November before a Divisional Court of the High Court. The case was appealed directly to the Supreme Court by the Government, leapfrogging the Court of Appeal, and was heard over four days in December 2016. The constitutional importance of the issue and today’s judgment is accentuated by the fact the appeal was heard by the full bench of eleven Justices. For more information, please see our Brexit e-bulletin published today.
In a landmark constitutional law ruling, the High Court yesterday ruled that the UK Government cannot trigger Article 50 without the approval of Parliament: R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the EU  EWHC 2768 (Admin).
The ruling is a victory for the claimants who brought the case against the Government’s position that it would trigger Article 50 through the use of the Royal Prerogative. A leapfrog appeal is expected to be heard by the Supreme Court on 7 and 8 December 2016, before a full court in view of the constitutional importance of the issue. For more information on the decision, see our Brexit e-bulletin published yesterday.
For a short practical guide on how Brexit may affect your commercial contracts, see English law contracts post-Brexit: What changes should commercial parties expect? Or for more of the firm’s latest thinking in relation to Brexit, see our Brexit hub page.
On Tuesday 18 October (12noon – 1.00pm UK time) we will present the first in a new series of webinars for Herbert Smith Freehills clients and contacts, focussing on the issues that arise in litigating cross border disputes. In this webinar:
- Larry Shore, a disputes partner in our New York office, will consider ways of obtaining evidence in the US for proceedings in England. Very broad disclosure is potentially available under 28 USC s1782 and Larry will discuss the opportunities and challenges this brings.
- Gitta Satryani, a disputes senior associate in our Singapore office, will consider the impact made by the Singapore International Commercial Court, launched in January 2015. She will also discuss changes in the rules for enforcement of Singapore judgments since the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements 2005 came into effect on 1 October 2016.
- Anna Pertoldi, a disputes partner in our London office, will look at choice of law and jurisdiction post Brexit and the different options available to the UK government in its negotiations with the EU.
The webinar is part of our series of “Soundbite” webinars, which are designed to update clients and contacts on the latest developments without having to leave their desks. The webinars can be accessed “live”, with a facility to send in questions by e-mail, or the archived version can be accessed after the event. If you would like to register for a webinar, or to obtain a link to the archived version, please contact Jane Webber.
The core principles of English contract law, such as interpretation of contracts and remedies for breach, will not be affected by Brexit and the key attractions of English law will remain.
Brexit may, however, have implications for particular aspects of parties’ contractual relationships, including how certain terms may be interpreted and whether any termination rights may be triggered, and on questions relating to jurisdiction and enforcement of judgments.
In this seventh of our series of contract disputes practical guides, Anna Pertoldi, Neil Blake and Alex Kay consider what might change post-Brexit, and provide some practical steps that contracting parties can take to protect their position. You can click here to download the PDF guide.
Clients and contacts of the firm can also register to access the archived version of our hour-long webinar exploring these issues by contacting Jane Webber. Or if you would prefer a shorter version focusing on key practical tips, Anna has also presented this 10 minute podcast.
The UK’s anticipated exit from the EU will have implications for many areas, including the enforcement of English court judgments across the EU. The ease (or otherwise) with which judgments may be enforced post-Brexit will depend on what arrangements are negotiated between the UK government and the EU.
Anna Pertoldi has published a post on Practical Law’s Dispute Resolution blog which considers the position post-Brexit and the potential options going forward to ensure the UK’s attractiveness as a jurisdiction is not diminished because of concerns over enforcement. Click here to read the post (or here for the Practical Law Dispute Resolution blog homepage).