Latest Articles

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.

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.

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.

Money Laundering: The UK Supreme Court’s Decision in El-Khouri Changes Scope of Extraterritoriality Under POCA

In the recent judgment in El-Khouri v. Government of the United States of America,[1] a case concerning the operation of the double criminality rule in the context of extradition, the UK Supreme Court made a seminal ruling on the extraterritorial limits of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA).