Enforcement

Subscribe to Enforcement via RSS

Motivated by a “visceral reaction” to large-scale economic crime, Nick Ephgrave lays out vision for a bolder, more pragmatic, and more proactive agency.

By Pamela Reddy and Matthew Unsworth

Whistleblowers, dawn raids, and cross-agency collaboration are all top of Nick Ephgrave’s agenda as he settles into his new role as Director of the UK’s Serious Fraud Office (SFO). Taking to the stage for his inaugural speech at the Royal United Services Institute last week,[i] Ephgrave gave a glimpse into his ambitious (if optimistic) plans for the agency under his leadership.

The CMA has launched a programme of work to investigate reports of businesses failing to respect cancellation rights during the COVID-19 pandemic.

By John D. Colahan and Anuj Ghai

The CMA’s COVID-19 Taskforce Update on 24 April 2020 noted that its COVID-19 Taskforce had received a significant volume of complaints about unfair practices in relation to cancellations and refunds. On 30 April, the CMA released a further update setting out the programme of work it intends to undertake to deal with the issues raised. The CMA will act under its consumer protection powers, rather than under competition law, to deal with unfair practices relating to cancellations and refunds.

The CMA has launched a programme of work to investigate reports of businesses failing to respect cancellation rights during the COVID-19 pandemic.

By John D. Colahan and Anuj Ghai

The CMA’s COVID-19 Taskforce Update on 24 April 2020 noted that its COVID-19 Taskforce had received a significant volume of complaints about unfair practices in relation to cancellations and refunds. On 30 April, the CMA released a further update setting out the programme of work it intends to undertake to deal with the issues raised. The CMA will act under its consumer protection powers, rather than under competition law, to deal with unfair practices relating to cancellations and refunds.

By Catriona E. Paterson

In its recent decision in L R Avionics Technologies Limited v. The Federal Republic of Nigeria & Attorney General of the Federation of Nigeria[1], the Commercial Court found that that premises owned by Nigeria were not “in use […] for commercial purposes” within the meaning of section 13(4) of the State Immunity Act (SIA) and therefore were not capable of being attached in proceedings for the enforcement of an arbitral award and judgment against the State.

In consequence, although successful in an underlying arbitration, L R Avionics Technologies Ltd (the Claimant) had its attempts to enforce its arbitral award frustrated by the rules of State immunity from enforcement as articulated in the SIA.