Expert Analysis

• Why Indonesia Feels Frustrated By Airbus Dispute Outcome

  

  Although the U.K. Serious Fraud Office’s Airbus bribery investigation achieved a record payout for regulators, Indonesia’s threat to sue for lack of credit for its contribution serves as a reminder of the need to take care when settlements are distributed among investigating partners, says Niall Hearty at Rahman Ravelli.

• UAE Bank Case Offers Lessons On Enforcing Foreign Rulings

  

  The High Court recently clarified in Invest Bank v. El-Husseini that foreign judgment debts may be enforceable in England, despite being unenforceable in their jurisdiction of origin, which should remind practitioners that foreign judgments will be recognized in England if they are final and conclusive in their court of origin, say lawyers at Macfarlanes.

• 9 Hallmarks Of The New German Class Action Regime

  

  By recently adopting a new class action regime, Germany is taking an incremental step toward more collective redress, which may fundamentally change its litigation landscape amid increased European regulatory activity, a growing focus on private enforcement of regulations, and a consumer-friendly German judiciary, say lawyers at Gibson Dunn.

• Protecting The Arbitral Process In Russia-Related Disputes

  

  Four recent High Court and Court of Appeal rulings concerning anti-suit injunction claims illustrate that companies exposed to litigation risk in Russia may need to carefully consider how to best protect their interests and the arbitral process with regard to a Russian counterparty, say lawyers at Linklaters.

• Examining US And Europe Patent Disclosure For AI Inventions

  

  As applicants before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and the European Patent Office increasingly seek patent protection for inventions relating to artificial intelligence, the applications may require more implementation details than traditional computer-implemented inventions, including disclosure of data and methods used to train the AI systems, say attorneys at Finnegan.

• Incontinence Drug Ruling Offers Key Patent Drafting Lessons

  

  In a long-awaited decision in Astellas v. Teva and Sandoz, an English court found that the patent for a drug used to treat overactive bladder syndrome had not been infringed, highlighting the interaction between patent drafting and litigation strategy, and why claim infringement is as important a consideration as validity, says George McCubbin at Herbert Smith.

• RSA Insurance Ruling Clarifies Definition Of 'Insured Loss'

  

  A London appeals court's recent ruling in Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance v. Tughans, that the insurer must provide coverage for a liability that included the law firm's fees, shows that a claim for the recovery of fees paid to a firm can constitute an insured loss, say James Roberts and Sophia Hanif at Clyde & Co.

• Putin Ruling May Have Unintended Sanctions Consequences

  

  By widening the scope of control, the Court of Appeal's recent judgment in Mints v. PJSC opens the possibility that everything in Russia could be deemed to be controlled by President Vladimir Putin, which would significantly expand the U.K.'s sanctions regime in unintended ways, say attorneys at Greenberg Traurig.

• EPO Decision Significantly Relaxes Patent Priority Approach

  

  In a welcome development for patent applicants, a recent European Patent Office decision redefines the way that entitlement to priority is assessed, significantly relaxing the previous approach and making challenges to the right to priority in post-grant opposition proceedings far more difficult, say lawyers at Finnegan.

• Landmark EU Climate Case May Shape Future Disputes

  

  The European Court of Human Rights' recent hearing in its first-ever climate change case Agostinho v. Portugal, concerning human rights violation claims due to countries' failure to curb emissions, may develop the law on admissibility and guide future climate disputes before domestic courts, say Stefanie Spancken-Monz and Leane Meyer at Freshfields.

• Bias Claim Highlights Need For Menopause Support Policies

  

  The recent U.K. Employment Tribunal case Rooney v. Leicester City Council, concerning a menopause discrimination claim, illustrates the importance of support policies that should feed into an organization's wider diversity, equity, inclusion and belonging strategies, say Ellie Gelder, Kelly Thomson and Victoria Othen at RPC.

• UK Case Offers Lessons On Hiring Accommodations

  

  The U.K. Employment Appeal Tribunal recently ruled in Aecom v. Mallon that an employer had failed to make reasonable adjustments to an online application for an applicant with a disability, highlighting that this obligation starts from the earliest point of the recruitment process, say Nishma Chudasama and Emily Morrison at SA Law.

• Shifting From Technical To Clear Insurance Contract Wordings

  

  Recent developments on insurance policies, including the Financial Conduct Authority's new consumer duty, represent a major shift for insurers and highlight the importance of drafting policies that actively improve understanding, rather than shift the onus onto the end user, say Tamsin Hyland and Jonathan Charwat at RPC.

• A Case For The Green Investment Regime Under The ECT

  

  The EU and U.K.'s potential plans to exit the Energy Charter Treaty, which has been criticized as protecting fossil fuel investments to the detriment of energy transition, ignore the significant strides taken to modernize the treaty and its ability to promote investment in cleaner energy forms, say Amy Frey and Simon Maynard at King & Spalding.

• How Employers Can Support Neurodiversity In The Workplace

  

  A recent run of cases emphasize employers' duties to make reasonable adjustments for neurodiverse employees under the Equalities Act, illustrating the importance of investing in staff education and listening to neurodivergent workers to improve recruitment, retention and productivity in the workplace, say Anna Henderson and Tim Leaver at Herbert Smith.