New laws allowing groups of EU consumers to launch class actions against traders are to be implemented by 25 December 2022 and will apply from June next year. The EU’s Representative Actions Directive (EU) 2020/1828 represents a major overhaul of the European class actions landscape, introducing mechanisms for group litigation in every one of the EU’s 27 Member States, alongside a new cross-border mechanism for class actions.
Latest Articles
In-house E-Disclosure Teams Should Not Be Vilified
Cabo Concepts Ltd v MGA Entertainments (UK) Ltd & Another has caused much agitation among litigators and e-disclosure professionals. On the face of it, the case appears to be a warning against conducting e-disclosure in-house. However, properly administered, the use of in-house technology and teams can be highly effective and efficient. Here are our key pointers for companies with in-house capabilities to ensure the smooth running of the disclosure process.
The 1996 Arbitration Act Under Review: The Law Commission Requests Comments on Proposed Reforms
On 22 September, the Law Commission published a consultation paper, together with a summary, on proposals to review certain sections of the Act.
Misleading ESG Claims – Will They Wash?
‘Greenwashing’ is the practice of a company providing information on its environmental, social and corporate governance (ESG) policies, or its products and practices, with the intent to present an environmentally responsible public image that masks harmful business practices.
US-UK Data Access Agreement: Top Five Things to Know
In May 2020, we published a blog post about the US-UK Data Access Agreement, a first-of-its-kind reciprocal agreement between the US and the UK. Under the agreement, law enforcement agencies in either country could obtain stored electronic data from communications service providers (CSPs) in the other country for the purpose of countering serious crime via a much-streamlined process, thereby overhauling the infamously sluggish mutual legal assistance process.
Courts continue to deter satellite litigation on witness statements
Despite having broad case management powers in respect of trial witness statements that do not comply with the procedural rules, judges are notably unwilling to impose the more draconian sanctions available to them. This week, in McKinney Plant & Safety Ltd v The Construction Industry Training Board, a claimant who had committed multiple breaches of the rules and had exacerbated those breaches by being entirely dismissive of the defendant’s objections, escaped with a relatively lenient adverse costs order.
Irremediable Mistakes
It is common for contracts to contain termination provisions that only allow for termination for a remediable breach if notice of the breach is given and the breaching party is allowed time to remedy it. For a party considering the application of such a clause, an obvious question is: what breaches do the courts consider capable of remedy? The High Court of England and Wales recently considered this in Stobart Capital Ltd v Esken Ltd. While not making new law, the case is a good reminder that the answer is maybe more than you think.
So¦ A crisis has arisen? Don’t Panic!
A crisis can take many different forms. Depending upon the nature of the business in question, a crisis can mean a crippling cyber-attack, material fraudulent activity coming to light, a whistleblower raising serious allegations of impropriety, or something else entirely that is unique to the business.
UK Supreme Court rules on whether a product is defective
A decision of the UK Supreme Court has reaffirmed recent judicial guidance on the approach to defects under the UK’s product liability regime and held that actions including the issuing of official notices and alerts by regulators and the manufacturer, and the voluntary withdrawal of the product range from the market, are not prima facie evidence of a defect alone and should be considered in light of other evidence.
Crypto-nite: Court of Appeal to consider whether cryptocurrency software developers owe a duty of care to currency owners
In Tulip Trading Ltd v Bitcoin Association for BSV and Others the High Court considered whether software developers of cryptocurrency networks could owe a duty of care to owners of digital assets that have been lost or stolen.