Please join Cooley’s litigation team for the third session of our continuing legal education (CLE) webinar series where we explore trends and insights on the disputes landscape in the UK and mainland Europe, and the issues that drive them.
Latest Articles
The UK Arbitration Bill Becomes an Act: Key Changes
On 24 February 2025, the UK Arbitration Act 2025 received royal assent. While it does not bring with it large-scale reform of the Arbitration Act 1996 (which was considered to be largely fit for purpose), some of the amendments are nevertheless significant. The following are of particular note.
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).
Court of Appeal Split on Scope of Exclusion Clause
In EE Ltd v. Virgin Mobile Telecoms Ltd[1], the Court of Appeal upheld the High Court’s decision that EE’s claim against Virgin was excluded under the terms of the parties’ telecommunications supply agreement.[2] While the decision ultimately confirmed the reasoning of the lower court, the decision is notable for being surprisingly close.
UK Online Safety Act: Age Assurance and Children’s Access Statement
On 16 January 2025, the UK Office of Communications (Ofcom) published its Statement on Age Assurance and Children’s Access, and officially commenced the process for user-to-user and search services (“Service Providers”) to conduct a children’s access assessment and implement robust age checks based on Ofcom’s published guidance. For completeness, we note that Ofcom also has published separate guidance on robust age checks for platforms that allow, display or publish their own pornographic content, but this is not considered further below.
Law of Privilege: ‘Shareholder Rule’ Held to Be Unjustifiable
In its decision last year in Aabar Holdings SARL v. Glencore PLC & Others,[1] the High Court handed down a landmark ruling overturning the ‘shareholder rule’, which has been applied to the analysis of legal professional privilege as between a company and its shareholders since the 19th century. The court deemed this long-settled principle of the law of privilege to be ‘unjustifiable’ and held that it should not be applied.
Cap in Hand: Should Liability Caps Be Applied Before or After Set-Off?
In Topalsson GmbH v. Rolls-Royce Motor Cars Limited,[1] the Court of Appeal helpfully re-affirmed that the ‘commonsense’ approach to the application of liability caps is to apply them before any set-off calculation.
UK Online Safety Act: Ofcom Publishes First Codes of Practice
The first binding Codes of Practice under the UK’s Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA) have now been published, requiring those in scope to take immediate action to become compliant. In particular, it is now a legal duty to carry out risk assessments for in-scope services against 17 kinds of illegal harms – including terrorism, hate, child sexual exploitation and abuse, fraud, and encouraging or assisting suicide.
‘After the Event’ Insurance Policy Given No Weight in Security for Costs Application
In Asertis Ltd v. Bloch,[1] in the context of a security for costs application, the English High Court determined that it could give no value to an ‘after the event’ (ATE) insurance policy even though it was supplemented with an ‘anti-avoidance endorsement’ (AAE). The policy at issue does not appear to have met market norms – in particular, it did not provide benefits directly to the defendant.
Gaming Industry Does Not Owe General Duty of Care to Customers
In a significant judgment for the gaming industry, the High Court of England and Wales held in Gibson v. TSE Malta LP (t/a Betfair)[1] that gambling operators do not owe a general duty of care to their customers to prevent gambling-related harm, and that licence conditions imposed on operators do not create implied terms in the contract between the consumer and the operator.