Latham.London

Tag Archives: UK supreme court

Court of Appeal: Professional Privilege Must Pass the “Dominant Purpose” Test

The Court narrowly interprets dominant purpose to exempt general tax advice from legal privilege. By Oliver E. Browne and Clare Nida In Financial Reporting Council Ltd v Frasers Group Plc (formerly Sports Direct International Plc) [2020] EWHC 2607 (Ch), the High Court handed down the latest ruling in relation to the Financial Reporting Council’s (FRC) … Continue Reading

UK Supreme Court Narrows Scope of “Reflective Loss” Principle

The decision overturns a series of cases deemed to have over-expanded a principle preventing shareholders from claiming against third parties for falls in a company’s value. By Oliver Middleton and Thomas F. Lane On 15 July 2020, the UK Supreme Court unanimously overturned a Court of Appeal decision that had barred a creditor of companies … Continue Reading

Court of Appeal Clarifies Legal Professional Privilege

The Court ruled on the “dominant purpose” test and offered guidance on the status of multiparty emails, and attachments. By Oliver Browne and Clare Nida Two recent Court of Appeal judgments have sought to clarify, and offer practical guidance relating to, legal professional privilege. In Civil Aviation Authority v. R (on behalf of the application … Continue Reading

UK Supreme Court Upholds First Successful Claim for Breach of Quincecare Duty

In a leading case, the Court examined the extent of the duty of care that a bank owes to its customers when executing their orders. By Andrea Monks and Nell Perks On 30 October 2019, the UK Supreme Court dismissed Daiwa’s appeal in the case of Singularis Holdings Ltd (In Official Liquidation) v Daiwa Capital … Continue Reading

UK Supreme Court: NOM Clauses Invalidate Oral Variations of Contracts

Judgment confirms the effectiveness of contractual provisions that prevent the parties from varying their contract orally. By Oliver E. Browne and Robert Price The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom recently held that an oral variation of a contract was invalid due to a No Oral Modification (NOM) clause contained in the contract. This clause … Continue Reading
LexBlog