"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: Private International Law
On 18 September 2024, the Supreme Court handed down judgment in UniCredit Bank GmbH v. RusChemAlliance LLC [2024] UKSC 30. The judgment of Lord Leggatt (with whom Lord Reed, Lord Sales, Lord Burrows and Lady Rose agreed) sets out the reasons for the Supreme Court’s dismissal of the appeal previously announced after the expedited hearing in mid-April. The case concerns proceedings brought in the Russian courts in breach of a clause contained in bonds providing for arbitration in Paris. Unicredit sought a final injunction in the English court to restrain the continuance of those proceedings. The Supreme Court determined two principal issues:
Read MoreArea of Law: Commercial Litigation
The High Court has delivered a landmark judgment in favour of the Republic of Mozambique, awarding damages and an indemnity for future losses totalling over $2 billion against the Privinvest Group in relation to events which have become known as the “tuna bonds” or “hidden debts” scandal. The proceedings concerned 3 sovereign guarantees purportedly granted by Mozambique to secure funding for maritime protection and tuna fishing supply contracts. The Republic of Mozambique contended that these guarantees had been procured by the bribery, amongst others, of the Minister of Finance, Mr Chang. Following a 13 week trial in the Commercial Court, the Hon. Mr Justice Knowles CBE held that payments made by or on behalf of the Privinvest Group and Mr Safa to or for the benefit of Mr Chang were bribes.
Read MoreArea of Law: UAE & DIFC Litigation
Permission to appeal was granted in China State Construction Engineering Corporation (Middle East) (L.L.C.) v Zaya Living Real Estate Development L.L.C and others [2023] DIFC ENF 316 (10 July 2024) this month, leaving the Court of Appeal of the Dubai International Financial Centre (“DIFC”) to decide who can be forced to answer questions about a company’s means of satisfying an unpaid judgment debt. The appeal relates to the scope of RDC 50.2(2), which states that the court may require an “officer” of a corporate body to attend court to answer questions about its means or other matters about which information is needed to enforce a judgment or order against a corporate judgment debtor. The appeal is therefore expected to have implications for the interpretation of the identical English provision of CPR 71.2(b). The DIFC Court of Appeal will review the decision of the DIFC Court of First Instance that a partner in a UAE-incorporated LLC holding 99% of its share capital – who has also held herself out as its ‘CEO’ – was not an “officer” under RDC 50.2(2). The appeal will therefore determine the meaning of “officer” in that RDC 50.2(2), joining a line of authorities on its English equivalents including Société Générale du Commerce et De L’Industrie en France v Johann Maria Farina & Co[1904] 1 KB 794 and Vitol SA v Capri Marine Ltd [2009] Bus. L.R. 271 (QBD). Creditors seeking to enforce judgments against companies will no doubt be hoping that the result of this appeal, expected to be heard later this year, improves their overall chances. Rupert Reed KC and Max Marenbon represented China State in its application for permission to appeal in the DIFC Court of Appeal, instructed by Daniel Xu, Gillian Flannighan and Hala Haddad of Eversheds Sutherland (International) LLP.
Read MoreArea of Law: Commercial Litigation
The High Court gave guidance on the procedure for setting aside default judgment last week in Gilbert & BG Projects v Broadoak Private Finance [2024] EWHC 2046 (Comm). Andrew Hochhauser KC, sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge, confirmed that a draft Defence should be filed well in advance of the hearing. He did so in a costs judgment following his recent decision in Gilbert & BG Projects v Broadoak Private Finance (unreported, 28 June 2024) to affirm a substantial default judgment in part, rejecting an application by the Defendant to set it aside completely (the “Set-Aside Application”). The substantive proceedings concerned claims for repayment of various loans made by the Claimants to the Defendant for onward lending to a third party. The Claimants accepted that the defence to repayment of certain loans should be allowed to go to trial. However, they maintained that the Default Judgment should be preserved in relation to four loans, with a cumulative value of approximately 58% by value of the Default Judgment (the “Opposed Loans”).
Read MoreIn a judgment handed down this morning, Mrs Justice Cockerill has given important guidance on the effect and scope of a submission to the jurisdiction by a defendant in proceedings.
Read MoreArea of Law: Group Litigation
The Court of Appeal has given guidance on the circumstances in which a group of claimants can together issue one claim form.
Read MoreArea of Law: Company
Jonathan Adkin KC and Adil Mohamedbhai continue to act for the dissenters in Re Jardine Strategic Holdings Limited, a multi-billion-dollar shareholder appraisal action in Bermuda concerning the Jardine group of companies, a Fortune Global 500 group of companies and one of the largest conglomerates in the world.
Read MoreArea of Law: Civil Fraud
Dan McCourt Fritz KC and Andrew Gurr act in successful committal application
Read MoreArea of Law: Intellectual Property
Michael Edenborough KC and Thomas St Quintin (Hogarth Chambers) (instructed by Brandsmiths) acted for the successful Respondent in the Supreme Court, which dismissed Amazon’s appeal on whether its amazon.com site had targeted customers in the UK. This now becomes the leading judgment on targeting and will provide helpful, detailed guidance on the matter.
Read MoreArea of Law: Company
Dan McCourt Fritz KC and Ramyaa Veerabathran successfully represented the respondent controlling shareholder, Ivy Loveridge, in an application made by her son, Michael Loveridge, under paragraph 74 of Schedule B1 to the Insolvency Act 1986 (the “Insolvency Application”), seeking to prevent the administrators of Breton Park Residential Homes Ltd (“Breton Park”) from rescuing it as a going concern on the basis that the proposed rescue would be unfair to his interests, purportedly as a shareholder of the company.
Read MoreArea of Law: Company
Lance Ashworth KC and Dan McCourt Fritz KC acted on behalf of the successful appellants, THG plc and others, in this unfair prejudice petition, instructed by Catherine Naylor and Tom Cox at Gowling WLG (UK) LLP.
Read MoreArea of Law: Private Client Trusts and Probate
Constance McDonnell KC and George Vare, assisted by Anneliese Mondschein, acted on behalf of the successful Claimants in this contested probate claim (instructed by Bernadette Baker, Kate Harris, and Anna Lambert of Birketts LLP).
Read MoreArea of Law: Intellectual Property
Elizabeth Jones KC acted for the successful defendants against members of the Wailers who claimed to have been parties to recording contracts with Bob Marley, and also claimed ownership of the copyrights in certain tracks written by Bob Marley.
Read MoreArea of Law: Intellectual Property
Michael Edenborough KC and Stephanie Wickenden have successfully represented Crafts Group in their appeal to the Court of Appeal in Crafts Group LLC v MS Indeutsch International [2024] EWCA Civ 87.
Read MoreArea of Law: Property
Jonathan Upton has successfully resisted an application to set aside the whole of a final order modifying covenants in a lease of a public house.
Read MoreArea of Law: Property
Amy Proferes acted for the successful respondents in Dyer v Webb [2023] EWHC 1917 (KB). Perhaps unusually for a neighbour dispute, the case (as noted by Dexter Dias KC in his judgment) "raises important questions about the nature, extent and limitations of certain of our fundamental freedoms under the law." The judgment confirms that objecting to planning applications, and discussing those applications with others, are rights protected under the Human Rights Act 1998.
Read MoreArea of Law: Chancery
Daniel Lightman KC and Reuben Comiskey (of Radcliffe Chambers), instructed by Stephen Baker of Herrington Carmichael, represented the successful appellants in Docklock Limited v C Christo & Co Limited [2024] EWCA Civ 45.
Read MoreArea of Law: Intellectual Property
Stephanie Wickenden and Niamh Herrett successfully represented Aldi in Thatchers Cider Company Limited v Aldi Stores Limited.
Read More
