Latham.London

Tag Archives: dispute resolution

Fraud Unravels All – Even Post-Judgment

English Supreme Court rules that there is no reasonable diligence requirement barring a fresh action to set aside a judgment obtained by fraud. Oliver E. Browne and Alex Cox Introduction In Takhar v Gracefield Developments Limited and others [2019] UKSC 13, the English Supreme Court considered whether a party applying to set aside an earlier … Continue Reading

Sections 68 and 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996 Have Bite!

A rare example of the English High Court varying an arbitral award. By Oliver E. Browne and Eleanor M. Scogings In Dakshu Patel v. Kesha Patel [2019] EWHC 298 (Ch), the English High Court upheld an appeal under section 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996 (the Act) against an arbitral award. The court concluded that … Continue Reading

English High Court: Public Interest Outweighed Confidentiality of Arbitration

Non-parties are entitled to obtain documents related to an arbitration if the case falls within the “interests of justice” exception. By Eleanor M. Scogings In The Chartered Institute of Arbitrators v B, C and D,[1] the English High Court granted the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (Institute) access to documents related to an arbitration for use … Continue Reading

English High Court Upholds Privilege Claim Over Client Instructions to Provide Confirmations

The decision clarifies how lawyer-client privilege applies in the context of transactions. By Daniel Smith and James Fagan The recent English High Court decision Raiffeisen Bank International AG v Asia Coal Energy Ventures Limited and Ashurst provides guidance on the application of legal advice privilege in a transaction context, confirming that confidential client instructions can … Continue Reading

Chinese Court Takes Pro-Arbitration Approach to Validity of International Arbitration Agreement

Parties must draft arbitration agreements with Chinese parties clearly and precisely to ensure validity and avoid unwanted litigation. By Oliver E. Browne and Isuru Devendra A Beijing court recently adopted a pro-arbitration approach in upholding the validity of an arbitration agreement designating a non-existent arbitral institution. While the decision reflects the increasingly pro-arbitration attitude of … Continue Reading

Arbitration Without an Express Arbitration Clause

Arbitral tribunal had jurisdiction despite the lack of an express arbitration clause. By Eleanor M. Scogings and Robert Price In Sonact Group Limited v Premuda Spa [2018] EWHC 3820, the English High Court confirmed that an arbitral tribunal had jurisdiction over a dispute arising from an informal settlement agreement — despite the fact that the … Continue Reading

English Court Provides Guidance for Commencing Proceedings on Foreign Defendants

The English Court has set aside permission to bring proceedings against foreign defendants based on non-disclosures and subsequent conduct. By Dan Smith and Duncan Graves The recent decision in Punjab National Bank (International) Limited v Ravi Srinivasan and others [2019] EWHC 89 (Ch) provides guidance on the proper conduct of an application for service out … Continue Reading

Service of Proceedings on a Foreign State Is Mandatory

An arbitration award cannot be enforced in England against a foreign State without serving the proceedings on that State through the diplomatic channels. By Robert Price In General Dynamics UK Ltd v Libya [2019] EWHC 64 (Comm), Males LJ, sitting in the Commercial Court, set aside parts of an order granting permission to enforce an … Continue Reading

English Court of Appeal Upholds an Extension of Time to Commence Arbitration

The Court allows an application to extend time for bringing arbitration proceedings under section 12(3) of the Arbitration Act 1996. By Robert Price and Eleanor Scogings In the recent case of Haven Insurance Company Limited v EUI Limited (T/A Elephant Insurance)[i], the English Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal against a High Court decision granting … Continue Reading

English Court of Appeal Clarifies Test for Determining Jurisdictional Challenges

Applicants challenging jurisdiction must satisfy a single three-limbed test, rather than establish a ‘good arguable case’ and ‘better of the argument’. By Oliver E. Browne and George Schurr The English Court of Appeal has clarified the correct test to be applied by the English courts when adjudicating a jurisdictional challenge. In the recent case of … Continue Reading

English High Court Confirms the Scope of Freezing Injunctions in Relation to Third-Party Assets

Third-party assets controlled (de facto or de jure) by the respondent are ordinarily outside the scope of a freezing injunction unless exceptional circumstances can be established. By Oliver E. Browne and George Schurr In the recent case of FM Capital Partners Ltd v Frédéric Marino, Aurélien Bessot, Yoshiki Ohmura, and Marit Sjovaag [2018] EWHC 2889 … Continue Reading

English Appellate Court Restricts Scope of Litigation Privilege

A recent ruling in West Ham v E20 has clarified the scope of litigation privilege and the circumstances in which courts will inspect documents over which privilege has been claimed. By Daniel Smith and Clare Nida In a significant decision, the English Court of Appeal has restricted the scope of litigation privilege in relation to … Continue Reading

SFO Update: Lisa Osofsky’s First 50 Days

New SFO Director reaffirms her intentions and priorities for the agency. By Stuart Alford QC, Nathan Seltzer, and Christopher Ting Fifty days have passed since Lisa Osofsky took over at the UK’s Serious Fraud Office (SFO), pledging to be a “different kind” of director. In her first days, Osofsky set out her priorities for the … Continue Reading

UK Serious Fraud Office Director Outlines Priorities in Keynote Speech

New director Lisa Osofsky confirms her focus on cross-border and corporate cooperation. By Stuart Alford QC, Nate Seltzer, and Clare Nida On 3 September 2018, in her first speech, after only one week as head of the UK’s Serious Fraud Office (SFO), Lisa Osofsky laid out her plans for the agency. Upon announcement of her appointment, … Continue Reading

English Court Issues Anti-Arbitration Injunction Restraining Lebanese Arbitration Proceedings

Judgment clarifies the exceptional circumstances in which anti-arbitration injunctions against foreign-seated arbitrations might be granted. By Oliver E. Browne and Robert Price In Sabbagh v Khoury, Justice Knowles in the High Court issued an anti-arbitration injunction to restrain arbitration proceedings commenced in Lebanon on the basis that, contrary to the Lebanese arbitral tribunal’s findings, the … Continue Reading

English Court Cannot Issue Anti-Suit Injunctions Restraining Other EU Court Proceedings

Judgement clarifies that the Brussels Recast Regulation does not reverse the West Tankers decision. By Oliver E. Browne and Robert Price In Nori Holdings v Bank Otkritie, Justice Males in the High Court issued an anti-suit injunction to restrain court proceedings commenced in Russia in breach of an arbitration clause, but refused to issue an … Continue Reading

UK Court of Appeal Confirms Rigidity of Part 36 Convention

Decision clarifies the court’s limit of discretion in departing from Part 36 cost consequence rules, even if a party behaved dishonestly. By Oliver Middleton The Court of Appeal has overturned a decision at first instance in which a claimant accused of dishonesty was punished by way having to pay not only the usual costs for … Continue Reading

A Significant Win for ISPs: UK Supreme Court rules on blocking order compliance costs

Favourable Supreme Court decision for ISPs finding they do not have to bear costs of complying with blocking orders. By Oliver Middleton Historically, internet service providers (ISPs) that have been ordered to block access to websites have had to bear their own costs of compliance on the basis that it was seen as being part … Continue Reading

UK To Provide Compensation for Overseas Victims of Economic Crimes

A new UK policy establishes a commitment to providing victims of overseas bribery with compensation; however, important questions remain that will impact implementation. By Stuart Alford QC, Nathan H. Seltzer, Joseph M. Bargnesi, Laila Hamzi, Clare Nida, and Christopher M. Ting The UK’s Serious Fraud Office (SFO), the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and the National … Continue Reading

Cartelised Products: In or Out of EEA? Only a Trial Will Tell

England may become an increasingly attractive forum for follow on damages claims, particularly those involving indirect cartelised product purchases initially acquired outside EEA the in wake of iiyama decisions. By Oliver E. Browne and Hayley M. Pizzey Summary The English Court of Appeal has held iiyama’s two claims against cathode ray tube (CRT) cartelists and … Continue Reading

English Court Provides Welcome Clarification on Key Arbitral Award Issues

The decision confirms that UNCITRAL Rules do not impose a higher procedural fairness burden than the Arbitration Act and that the foreign act of state doctrine applies in arbitrations. By Oliver E. Browne The Commercial Court considered various challenges to an arbitral award under the Arbitration Act 1996 (the Act) in Reliance Industries Ltd and … Continue Reading

Court Rules that Arbitrators Must Disclose Related or Overlapping Appointments

Arbitrators should disclose subsequent appointments to related arbitration proceedings, particularly if cases materially overlap. By Oliver E. Browne and Robert Price In the Halliburton v Chubb ruling, the Court of Appeal held that an arbitrator who did not disclose subsequent appointments to related arbitration proceedings should have disclosed those subsequent appointments both as a matter … Continue Reading

High Court Decision in Norske Skog: Puh! (Norwegian for Phew!)

Ruling confirms majority noteholder should not be disenfranchised from voting By Simon J. Baskerville, Sophie J. Lamb QC, Bradley J. Weyland, and Eleanor M. Scogings The English High Court held that it had jurisdiction in a cross-border dispute involving the Norske Skog group (Norske Skog), and confirmed that a majority noteholder did not “control” the … Continue Reading
LexBlog