The English Court of Appeal’s judgment in KSY Juice Blends UK Ltd v. Citrosuco GmbH[1] provides helpful guidance on the enforceability of long-term supply contracts where the price for part of the goods is left open to be agreed in the future. The judgment is particularly notable for its analysis of when a court will imply a term for a reasonable or market price, and its willingness to uphold commercial bargains in the face of contractual uncertainty.
Latest Articles
Are You in This Party? The Scope of Section 213 of the Insolvency Act 1986
The UK Supreme Court recently handed down a judgment in Tradition Financial Services Ltd v Bilta (UK) Ltd & Others[1] in which it considered the scope of section 213 of the Insolvency Act 1986, specifically whether those beyond the small group of individuals with controlling or managerial functions of the liquidated company could be ‘party to’ the carrying on of a company’s business with intent to defraud creditors.
UK Civil Justice Council Publishes Review of Litigation Funding
The Civil Justice Council (CJC) has published its highly anticipated final report on the regulation and development of litigation funding in England and Wales. This comprehensive report addresses the implications of the UK Supreme Court decision in R (on the application of PACCAR Inc & others) v. Competition Appeals Tribunal & others,[1] examines various funding mechanisms, and proposes legislative reforms to clarify and regulate these funding types.
Class Dismissed? Representative Claims in Getty v. Stability AI
Earlier this year, the English High Court considered an application for strike out of a representative action in the ongoing dispute between Getty and Stability AI. The case is at the intersection of intellectual property (IP) issues in connection with generative artificial intelligence (AI) and class actions in the UK – issues close to Cooley’s heart – and we have been following developments with interest. The trial is listed to be heard in June, and so we’ll likely need to wait a while longer before we receive a decision on the IP implications arising from the use of third-party materials to train generative AI models. However, this recent decision provides insight into the extent to which the English court will be prepared to entertain class actions for IP claims, even in respect of complex tech litigation.
On the Record: Cooley Litigation Trends Webinar Series – Dispute Resolution Clauses
This webinar will aim to answer all your most burning questions around drafting the “perfect” dispute resolution clause, to bulletproof your business from litigation risk across Europe.
Tuesday, 24 June 2025 – 4:30-5:30pm BST
Mediation: Cracking the Hardest Nuts
The last couple of years have seen a dramatic rise in the promotion of alternative dispute resolution generally and mediation in particular by the English judiciary. The Court of Appeal in Churchill v. Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council[1] held that, contrary to popular belief, the courts had the power to order parties to mediate; the Civil Procedure Rules were duly amended to incorporate that power explicitly. And then, in DKH Retail Limited & Others v. City Football Group Limited[2], the court made the first compulsory mediation order.
On the Record: Cooley Litigation Trends Webinar Series – Content and Safety Litigation
With online safety laws becoming prolific – and content moderation and child protection obligations at the forefront of this – how are we starting to see this sea-change play out in litigation? In this webinar session, we’ll explore related developments across the UK, EU and US.
Two Judgments on Forum Challenges
Two notable English court judgments on jurisdiction have been handed down in the last few months – the first being the Court of Appeal’s decision in Limbu & Others v. Dyson Technology Ltd & Others[1], and the second the High Court’s decision in da Silva & Others v. Brazil Iron Ltd & Another[2]. Both cases involved group litigation against UK-domiciled companies in respect of the actions of third parties overseas. In both cases, the defendants challenged the English courts’ jurisdiction on the grounds that the respective foreign courts were the more appropriate forum for the dispute. In both cases, the court rejected the challenge and retained jurisdiction. In Limbu, the Court of Appeal found, contrary to the conclusion of the High Court, that England was the more appropriate forum. In da Silva, however, the High Court found that Brazil was the more appropriate forum, but it nevertheless retained jurisdiction on the grounds that there was a real risk that the claimants would not obtain substantial justice in Brazil.
The Million-Pound Question (Revisited): Is My Contract Unfair?
The decision of the High Court of England and Wales in Durber v. PPB Entertainment Ltd is another helpful case study in how to host a consumer-facing website.[1] It is interesting, given how much time is spent carefully drafting the substance of terms and conditions, that the presentation of those same terms and conditions to consumers can sometimes be an afterthought. If companies do not get this right, there is a real risk that they may be providing consumers with the ammunition they need to argue that any relevant terms and conditions are unenforceable against them.
On the Record: Cooley Litigation Trends Webinar Series – Update on Key Issues in Crypto Disputes
Please join Cooley’s litigation team for the fourth session of our webinar series “Update on Key Issues in Crypto Disputes”
In this webinar we will delve into the evolving landscape of crypto disputes litigation in the UK and EU. As the adoption of cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology continues to rise, so do the legal challenges and disputes associated with them. This webinar is designed for legal professionals, financial institutions, and anyone interested in understanding the complexities of crypto-related litigation.