Contract/Commercial

Showing: 31 - 40 of 62 Articles
Civil Procedure Contract/Commercial

High Court Endorses Seven Principles for Securing Precautionary Injunctions

Injunctions are typically sought by parties after wrongdoing has already taken place. However, the English courts may grant a ‘quia timet’ – or ‘precautionary’ – injunction to prevent an actionable wrong from being committed.

In University of Brighton v. Persons Unknown Occupying Land, the High Court of England and Wales granted a final injunction preventing protesters from occupying certain areas of the claimant’s executive administration office. This judgment provides a useful restatement of the principles applied by the courts when determining whether to award a precautionary injunction.

Arbitration Contract/Commercial Technology

High Court Rules Arbitral Awards Don’t Deprive English Court of Jurisdiction in Crypto Consumer Claim

In Chechetkin v. Payward Ltd and Others[1], the High Court of England and Wales ruled that the existence of an arbitration clause in an agreement between the parties should not prevent the court from hearing the UK consumer’s claim for repayment of sums lost through his trading on the defendants’ cryptocurrency exchange.

Contract/Commercial

Limitation of Liability: Court Considers Key Principles of Interpretation

In Drax Energy Solutions Limited v. Wipro Limited, the Technology and Construction Court considered the proper interpretation of a limitation of liability clause. The judgment provides a useful summary of the principles that apply to such an exercise. It is particularly notable that the court gave very little weight in the circumstances to the notion that in the absence of clear words, the court will assume that parties generally do not intend to derogate from the normal rights they would otherwise have.

Contract/Commercial

A Taxing Question: Just When Does a Duty of Care Arise?

The decision of the Court of Appeal in the closely watched case of David McClean & Ors v. Andrew Thornhill KC[1]helpfully rearticulates the established principles governing when a duty of care may arise and the scope of such a duty. It is widely understood that any professional advice needs to be given with sufficient confidence as to allow the recipient to act upon it, but in addition, that the risks associated with that advice also need to be clearly outlined, so that the recipient is not blind to potentially adverse consequences. How this balance is navigated is difficult and only becomes more so when the recipient of the advice wants to share it with third parties to give them comfort on the issues at hand.

Contract/Commercial Technology

Unlocking Cryptocurrency: Commercial Court Facilitates Recovery From Outside Jurisdiction

The London Circuit Commercial Court has handed down a significant judgment regarding the recovery of crypto-assets held on cryptocurrency exchanges and the practicalities of the enforcement of judgments against ‘persons unknown’ located outside the jurisdiction of England and Wales.

The court’s decision in Law v. Persons Unknown and Huobi Global Limited paves the way for future claimants to recover crypto-assets that have ended up outside of the jurisdiction with greater ease and highlights the English courts’ practical approach to the resolution of crypto-asset disputes.

Contract/Commercial

Warranties: Know Their Limits

In its judgment in Decision Inc Holdings Proprietary Limited v. Garbett and El-Mariesh, the High Court of England and Wales provided guidance on the interpretation of two types of warranties commonly found in sale and purchase agreements (SPAs): warranties as to the accuracy of a company’s records and warranties as to no material adverse change in respect of turnover and/or prospects.

The claimant in the case was ultimately successful. However, buyers should take note that, despite being provided with misleading information about the company’s financial performance, the claimant was not able to make out its claims for breach of warranty as to the accuracy of the company’s records or as to no material adverse change in respect of turnover. The sometimes surprisingly narrow interpretation of the scope of warranties must be appreciated, so that buyers can ensure they actually have the recourse they think they will.

Contract/Commercial

Under the Cover of an Umbrella (Agreement)?

Last summer, the High Court handed down its judgment in Mackie Motors (Brechin) Limited v. RCI Financial Services Limited,[1]in a case that had far-reaching consequences – not only for automotive dealers across the UK, but also for any company that considers itself to be operating under the terms of an implied umbrella agreement.

Contract/Commercial Technology

The Million Pound Question: Is My Contract Unfair?

The decision of the High Court of England and Wales in Parker-Grennan v. Camelot UK Lotteries Limited is a helpful case study in how to host a consumer-facing website. It is surprising, given how much care and attention is afforded to the content of terms and conditions, how the presentation of those same terms and conditions to consumers can often 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. Accordingly, companies would be well served to revisit their practices to ensure they are not creating unnecessary hurdles for themselves to overcome when seeking to rely on their terms and conditions in any dispute.