Expert Analysis

• Landmark VAT Ruling Should Shift HMRC Reply On Guidance

  

  The recent decision in Hotelbeds Ltd. v. Revenue and Customs Commissioners on the recovery of input tax, confirming that HMRC is bound to comply with its own guidance, will make the agency rethink its usual response to allegations that the policy was not law, say lawyers at Kennedys.

• Decoding Arbitral Disputes: Arbitrator's Conviction Upheld

  

  The Supreme Court of Spain recently upheld the criminal conviction of arbitrator Gonzalo Stampa for grave disobedience to judicial authority, rejecting the proposition that an arbitrator's independence can prevail over a court order retroactively disabling the very judicial act conferring arbitral jurisdiction, says Josep Galvez at 4-5 Gray's Inn.

• Waldorf Ruling Signals Recalibration For Restructuring Plans

  

  The recent High Court landmark judgment refusing to sanction Waldorf Production PLC's restructuring plan underscores a change in the way courts assess whether such plans are fair, indicating not their demise but a pivotal moment in their evolution, say lawyers at Simpson Thacher.

• What Key EU Data Ruling Means For Cross-Border Transfers

  

  The European Union Court of Justice’s recent judgment in European Data Protection Supervisor v. Single Resolution Board takes a recipient-specific approach concerning pseudonymized information, but financial services firms making international transfers should follow the draft EU Data Protection Board guidelines’ current stricter approach, says Nathalie Moreno at Kennedys Law.

• Poundland Restructuring Plan Highlights Insolvency Law Shift

  

  Poundland’s recently approved £95.2 million restructuring plan in the High Court under Companies Act, Part 26A, demonstrates that the relatively new provision has become an increasingly popular option for rescuing large companies facing insolvency, says Gavin Kramer at Collyer Bristow.

• EU-US Data Transfer Ruling Offers Reassurance To Cos.

  

  The European Union General Court’s recent upholding of the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework in Latombe v. European Commission, although subject to appeal, provides companies with legal certainty for the first time by allowing the transfer of European Economic Area personal data without relying on alternative mechanisms, say lawyers at Wilson Sonsini.

• Privy Council Shareholder Rule Repeal Is Significant For Cos.

  

  The recent Privy Council ruling in Jardine v. Oasis Investment abrogates the shareholder rule, which precluded a company from claiming legal advice privilege for document production in shareholder litigation, providing certainty to company directors seeking legal advice, say lawyers at Harneys.

• Israeli Ruling Shows A Non-EU ICSID Enforcement Approach

  

  An Israeli district court's recent decision declining to enforce an International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes award served as a prominent testing ground for how a non-European Union jurisdiction approaches the enforcement of an intra-EU award against an EU member state, says Josep Galvez at 4-5 Gray’s Inn.

• Supreme Court Ruling Stands Firm On Trust Law Principles

  

  The U.K. Supreme Court’s recent strict application of trust law in Stevens v. Hotel Portfolio may render it more difficult for lawyers in future cases to make arguments based on a holistic assessment of the facts, says Olivia Retter at Quinn Emanuel.

• High Court Freezing Order Ruling Highlights Strict CPR Rules

  

  The recent High Court decision in AAA v. BBB to set aside an expired worldwide freezing order serves as a reminder to injunctive relief practitioners that rules are there to be followed, and that it is critical to adhere to timings, say lawyers at Greenberg Traurig.

• AI Risks Legal Sector Must Consider In Dispute Resolution

  

  Artificial intelligence presents significant opportunities to lawyers and decision-makers navigating increasingly data-heavy legal proceedings, but two recent cases provide a sobering reminder of the potential for misuse, say lawyers at White & Case.

• UK Supreme Court Dissent May Spark Sanctions Debate

  

  While the recent U.K. Supreme Court's rejection of Eugene Shvidler’s appeal determined that sanctions decisions are primarily the government’s preserve, Justice Leggatt’s dissenting view that judges are better placed to assess proportionality will cause ripples and may mark a material shift in how future appeals are approached, say lawyers at Seladore.

• What UK's New Prosecution Guidance Means For Compliance

  

  Recent guidance from the U.K.'s Serious Fraud Office and Crown Prosecution Service, aligning their approach with the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act, offers a timely prompt for corporate boards and legal teams to update their risk management frameworks, say lawyers at Signature Litigation.

• Decoding Arbitral Disputes: ICSID Enforcement In Australia

  

  The Federal Court of Australia recently ruled for award creditors in Blasket Renewable Investments v. Spain in a judgment that explains how Australia's statute book operationalizes the promise of depoliticized enforcement under the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes Convention while accommodating, without yielding to, the centrifugal forces of European Union law, says Josep Galvez at 4-5 Gray's Inn.

• How AI May Have Made A Difference In Monzo Bank Breaches

  

  Artificial intelligence tools have the capabilities needed to keep pace with increasingly sophisticated threats, and such tools might have helped prevent the anti-money laundering failures that led to the recent £21.1 million fine against Monzo Bank, says Alexander Vilardo at Howard Kennedy.