Expert Analysis

• How Top Court Ruling Limits Scope Of Motor Finance Claims

  

  The U.K. Supreme Court’s recent ruling in a landmark case concerning car finance commissions clarifies when and how a dealership’s fiduciary duties arise, considerably narrowing that path for mass consumer litigation and highlighting how an upcoming Financial Conduct Authority redress scheme will seek to balance consumer, lender and market interests, say lawyers at Cadwalader.

• Why Leveson Review Is Significant For UK Court System

  

  Brian Leveson’s recent review into the U.K. criminal justice system calls for judge-only trials in serious and complex fraud cases, a controversial recommendation that is sparking debate over the future of jury trials, says Louise Hodges at Kingsley Napley.

• High Court Elects Substance Over Form In Arbitration Dispute

  

  The High Court recently found that an arbitral tribunal has jurisdiction over the dispute in Ras Al Khaimah Investment Authority v. India, underscoring the importance of aligning treaty interpretation with the goal of fostering investment, while rejecting interpretations that unduly limit investor protections, says Josep Galvez at 4-5 Gray's Inn.

• French Plans For Call-In Powers Signal More Merger Scrutiny

  

  The French Competition Authority’s intention to draft a call-in mechanism for below-threshold transactions demonstrates a growing appetite to expand national investigation tools that will require a balance of effective control and legal certainty to reduce the burden on merging companies, say lawyers at Linklaters.

• Decoding Arbitral Disputes: UK Injunctions Across Borders

  

  A recent High Court of Justice decision allowing JPMorgan Chase Bank to block VTB Bank from bringing suit in a Russian court provides a seminal reflection on the power of English courts to issue antisuit injunctions when global banking disputes increasingly straddle multiple jurisdictions, says Josep Galvez of 4-5 Gray's Inn.

• Saxon Woods Ruling Tightens Rules On Director Good Faith

  

  The recent Court of Appeal judgment in Saxon Woods v. Costa departs from the High Court's ruling, clarifying that a director's sincere belief they have acted in the company’s best interests is not sufficient to satisfy the statutory requirement to act in good faith, say lawyers at Covington.

• ICSID Annulment Proceedings Carry High Stakes For System

  

  The annulment proceedings brought by Freeport-McMoRan before the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes, seeking to redress a glaring and prejudicial oversight in its arbitral award against Peru, are significant for delimiting the boundaries of procedural fairness within the ICSID's annulment framework, says Josep Galvez at 4-5 Gray's Inn.

• Key Takeaways As EU And UK Impose New Russia Sanctions

  

  The European Union and U.K.’s new sanctions on Russia, designating increasing numbers of non-Russian companies in the defense and shipping sectors, mean that organizations must examine from the outset whether a transaction has any nexus with the EU or the U.K., say lawyers at Sullivan & Cromwell.

• Decoding Arbitral Disputes: Prestige's Jurisprudential Legacy

  

  The U.K. Supreme Court's recent denial of appeal ended Spain's decades-long quest to enforce an €855 million arbitral judgment against a London insurer, throwing into stark relief the increasingly complex relationship between arbitral sovereignty, foreign state immunity and the shifting terrain of post-Brexit private international law, says Josep Galvez at 4-5 Gray's Inn.

• German Ruling Further Restrains Intra-EU Bilateral Arbitration

  

  The German Federal Court of Justice recently issued a notable ruling that pushes the invalidation of intra-European Union bilateral investment treaty arbitration into the realm of stand-alone cost decisions, strengthening the EU's legal framework while increasing uncertainty for investors in the region, say attorneys at Linklaters.

• High Court Ruling Shows Firm Stance On Procedural Integrity

  

  The recent High Court decision in Qatar Investment v. Phoenix Ancient Art demonstrates its zero tolerance of procedural failure, serving as a reminder that the financial burden associated with document disclosure will not excuse a party’s failure to comply with court orders, say lawyers at Quillon Law.

• A Shifting Landscape Of Greater Scrutiny After Data Breaches

  

  Recent Information Commissioner's Office fines for personal data breaches and a Home Office consultation signal a shift in the U.K. regulatory landscape, and with an increase in mass actions and resulting exposure, organizations should prepare for potential third-party claims from those incurring consequential losses, say lawyers at Atheria.

• Decoding Arbitral Disputes: An Update On ICSID Annulment

  

  The International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes' recent decision in Peteris Pildegovics and SIA North Star v. Kingdom of Norway offers a reasoned and principled contribution to annulment jurisprudence, effectively balancing the competing imperatives of fairness, finality and institutional coherence, says Josep Galvez at 4-5 Gray's Inn.

• UK Data Disputes Could Become Competition Class Actions

  

  While mass data protection claims have chafed against the procedural restrictions that apply to class actions under U.K. law, it is possible these claims will be brought into the fold of the rapidly growing Competition Appeal Tribunal scene, says Aislinn Kelly-Lyth at Blackstone Chambers.

• Opinion

  UK Court Of Appeal's FRAND Ruling Is Troubling

  

  The U.K. Court of Appeal's recent decision in Optis v. Apple disregards a lower court's extensive factual findings and contradicts its own precedent regarding fair, reasonable and nondiscriminatory terms for cellular patents, says Enrico Bonadio at the University of London.