"impressive silks and juniors are praised for their strength in depth"
Serle Court “offers a variety of skill sets that others can’t provide, and houses some of the biggest names at the Bar”
Area of Law: Intellectual Property
Michael Edenborough KC and Stephanie Wickenden acted in this last appeal from the EUIPO to the General Court that was filed just before the UK left the EU on 31 December 2020 and that was signed by a UK advocate. It concerned the issue of targeted use in the context of a non-use allegation.
Read MoreArea of Law: EU Law
Judgment of the General Court in Case T-508/19 Mead Johnson Nutrition (Asia Pacific) and Others v Commission: partial annulment the Commission decision finding non-taxation of royalty income in Gibraltar constituted unlawful State Aid.
Read MoreArea of Law: Company
Minority shareholders in plcs will welcome a judgment handed down this morning which has broadened their options. For the first time in this jurisdiction, the Court has ordered the winding up of a listed plc on the just and equitable ground under section 122(1)(g) of the Insolvency Act 1986 for loss of substratum. In a reserved judgment following a two-week trial in February 2022, in Re Klimvest plc [2022] EWHC 596 (Ch) the High Court clarified and modernised English law in line with more recent Australian authorities. HH Judge Cawson QC (sitting as a High Court Judge) held that the identification of a company’s purpose or substratum is a matter of equity between the company – even a listed plc – and its shareholders, rather than a formalistic exercise in construing the corporate constitution. The purpose is lost, potentially triggering winding-up by the Court, not only where carrying it out is “practically impossible” for the company, but also where it has been, or will be, abandoned. Judge Cawson QC applied the dictum of Jenkins J in Re Eastern Telegraph Co., Ltd [1947] 2 All ER 104 that “if a shareholder has invested his money in the shares of the company on the footing that it is going to carry out some particular object, he cannot be forced against his will by the votes of his fellow shareholders to continue to adventure his money on some quite different project or speculation”.
Read MoreArea of Law: Private Client Trusts and Probate
On 31 January, judgment was handed down by Michael Green J in Reeves v Drew & Ors [2022] EWHC 159 (Ch), one of the most valuable probate claims ever determined in this jurisdiction. The Court held that the wealthy but illiterate testator had not known or approved of the contents of a will which left 80% of his estate to a daughter (the claimant), and inexplicably omitted a son and two grandchildren of whom he was very fond. The Court held that the claimant had likely engineered the will-making process so that she would get the bulk of the estate. The will was prepared by a solicitor with whom the claimant was already familiar, and who was prepared to create a false trail of evidence in the will file.
Read MoreArea of Law: Civil Fraud
On 26 January, the Court of Appeal handed down its judgment in The Public Institution for Social Security v Al Rajaan & others [2022] EWCA Civ 29. The Court dismissed the Claimant’s appeal, which was heard over three days in December 2021, and confirmed that the English court has no jurisdiction to hear bribery and money-laundering claims against a number of Swiss-domiciled individuals and entities.
Read MoreArea of Law: Private Client Trusts and Probate
In 1928 £500,000, referred to as the "National Fund", was settled on trust to accumulate income and profits until the date fixed by the trustees as being the date when, either alone or together with other funds then available for the purpose, it was sufficient to discharge the National Debt. At that time, the Fund was to be transferred to the National Debt Commissioners to be applied by them in reduction of the National Debt. A special Act had been passed to permit such indefinite accumulations for that purpose. Since 1928 the Fund has had many large and small additional gifts made to it.
Read MoreArea of Law: Commercial Litigation
Lord Justice Nugee handed down judgment yesterday in Kea Investments Ltd v Watson [2022] EWHC 5 (Ch), rejecting a committed contemnor’s argument that his costs should be paid by the successful applicant. This judgment will be of interest to parties considering committal as a means to secure compliance with court orders as well as to those whose clients are in breach of those orders.
Read MoreArea of Law: Commercial Litigation
On 10 January 2022, Mr Justice Henshaw handed down judgment in Barclays Bank Plc v Shetty [2022] EWHC 19 (Comm) which is of interest to litigators facing adjournment applications and those seeking to enforce foreign judgments in England at common law.
Read MoreArea of Law: Intellectual Property
Stephanie Wickenden acted for the successful Claimant on the Defendant’s application to strike out the claim so far as it sought pan-EU27 relief, arguing that the UK court had no jurisdiction to grant EU-wide remedies after 1 January 2021. While permission to appeal was granted by the Chancellor, Sir Julian Flaux, the Defendants eventually abandoned its appeal before it was heard and paid the Claimant’s costs.
Read More
