"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
Thomas Elias acted for the claimants in this cross-jurisdictional trade mark dispute arising in the context of a sale of shares in one of the defendant companies. At an interim hearing, the claimants resisted applications for a stay and for security for costs, and obtained an unless order against the defendants.
Read MoreArea of Law: Property
Mr Justice Richards' judgment in Prescott Place Freeholders Limited & Others v Batin & Donovan [2023] EHWC 435 is essential reading for those interested in tenants’ rights of first refusal under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987. Michael Walsh acted for the successful Claimants.
Read MoreArea of Law: Civil Fraud
The Singapore International Commercial Court (International Judge Bergin) has today handed down judgment following the trial of the dispute between Bidzina Ivanishvili and other plaintiffs and Credit Suisse Trust Limited. The claim stemmed from the long-running fraud committed by Patrice Lescaudron, an employee of Credit Suisse Bank in Geneva.
Read MoreArea of Law: Company
Justin Higgo KC acted for the successful Claimant in Trafalgar Multi Asset Trading Company Ltd v Hadley & Ors [2023] EWHC 1184 (Ch), both in the High Court and the Court of Appeal.
Read MoreArea of Law: Property
In Healey v Fraine & Others [2023] EWCA Civ 549, the Court of Appeal has decided that Parliament did not intend to change the law of adverse possession in the Land Registration Act 2002 so that occupiers of land could be in possession with the consent of the owner and also be in adverse possession at the same time for the purposes of paragraph 5 of schedule 6 of the Act. The Court decided that the meaning of adverse possession had not changed.
Read MoreArea of Law: Civil Fraud
The Court of Appeal handed down judgment on Tuesday 25th April 2023 in Floreat Investment Management Limited v Churchill & Ors [2023] EWCA Civ 440, in which it reversed a finding of dishonesty made at first instance and entered judgment in favour of the appellants. The decision also provides useful guidance as to the appropriate content and structure of trial closing submissions.
Read MoreArea of Law: Company
The Court of Appeal handed down judgment on Wednesday, 19th April 2023, in Hunt v Ubhi [2023] EWCA Civ 417 in which it reiterated that the default rule is that applicants for freezing orders, including office holders, must provide unlimited cross undertakings in damages and that a departure from the default rule must be justified.
Read MoreArea of Law: Civil Fraud
Mrs Justice Cockerill has recently handed down judgment in PJSC National Bank Trust v Mints [2023] EWHC 118 (Comm) in which she considered the effect of the Russian sanctions on various litigation issues. In short, she held that sanctioned claimants can sue for damages and judgment can be entered in their favour without the regulations being contravened; and payment of costs to and by sanctioned persons (i.e. adverse and favourable) and security for costs to be provided by sanctioned persons are licensable activities.
Read MoreArea of Law: Company
On 18th January 2023, Fancourt J handed down judgment in the ongoing unfair prejudice petition Zedra Trust Company (Jersey) Limited v. THG plc [2023] EWHC 65 (Ch), after the Court of Appeal had in 2021 struck out complaints that Zedra’s shareholding had been diluted [2021] EWCA Civ 904.
Read MoreArea of Law: Civil Fraud
In Frain (aka Reeves) v Reeves [2023] EWHC 73 (Ch), Elizabeth Jones KC and Paul Adams successfully opposed the grant of permission to bring committal proceedings in relation to alleged false statements made in pleadings and witness statements containing a statement of truth, and in disclosure statements. Significant aspects of the judgment include (a) confirmation at [26]-[32] that where it can be seen at the permission stage that more than one inference may reasonably be drawn in relation to evidence advanced in support of a committal application, the claimant will be unable to establish a strong prima facie case to the criminal standard at trial, so that permission should not be granted, (b) confirmation at [37]-[39] of the importance of the applicant’s case on a committal application being clearly and fully set out within the four corners of the application and (c) the Judge’s decision at [42] that a judgment made at the trial of underlying proceedings out of which a committal application arises is not admissible in the committal application against a person who was a witness in but not a party to the original proceedings.
Read MoreArea of Law: Company
James Mather and Mark Wraith appeared for the successful appellant in Malik v Hussain [2023] EWCA Civ 2, in which the Court of Appeal held that where there was a term requiring contracts to be exchanged within seven days of payment of the deposit by a successful bidder that only required the bidder to exchange within seven days of being presented with a contract in a form capable of being present with a contract in a form capable of being executed and exchanged. The issue arose in the context of a long-running partnership and company dispute concerning the ownership of a prominent restaurant business in Manchester. In previous trials James and Mark successfully established the disputed existence of the partnership and that the claimant was entitled to require an open market sale of the relevant assets rather than a buy-out at a valuation determined by the court.
Read MoreArea of Law: International and Offshore
The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council has handed down its advice in Jean-Charles v The Attorney General of The Bahamas and ors [2022] UKPC 51. The decision establishes that a constitutional challenge may be made in an action for habeas corpus and that separate legal proceedings are not required.
Read MoreArea of Law: Commercial Litigation
On 30 November, Mr Justice Foxton sitting in the Commercial Court, KBD handed down judgment in the matter of Ticehurst & Ors v Harbour Fund II LP & Ors [2022] EWHC 3053 (Comm). Elizabeth Jones KC, instructed by Harcus Parker led Daniel Saoul KC (4 New Square), and Richard Hoyle and Lorraine Aboagye (Essex Court) on behalf of Harbour.
Read MoreArea of Law: Private Client Trusts and Probate
The Privy Council has today handed down judgment allowing the appeals of Dr Winston Wong, Riley Wong and Tony Wang in the conjoined appeals of Grand View Private Trust Co Ltd and another (Respondents) v Wong and others [2022] UKPC 47. In one of the most important trusts law judgments in recent years the Board unanimously held that the exercise of a power adding and excluding beneficiaries was void on the basis that it was inconsistent with the purpose for which the power was conferred. The judgment has important implications for the exercise of fiduciary powers more generally. Of the eleven barristers from English chambers who appeared in the Privy Council, eight were from Serle Court: Dakis Hagen KC, Emma Hargreaves and Stephanie Thompson (instructed by Baker & McKenzie (London) and ASW Law Limited (Bermuda)) acted for the appellants in the first appeal; Richard Wilson KC, James Weale and Charlotte Beynon (instructed by Stewarts, MJM Limited (Bermuda) and Baker McKenzie (Taipei)) acted for the appellant in the second appeal; Jonathan Adkin KC and Adil Mohamedbhai acted for the respondent in both appeals (instructed by Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom (London) and Conyers Dill & Pearman (Bermuda)).
Read MoreArea of Law: Company
Five members of Serle Court appeared in the recent case of Guy’s & St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust and Anor v ESMS Global Limited and Ors [2022] EWHC 2491 (Comm), on both sides of an application to strike out the Claim and for reverse summary judgment.
Read MoreArea of Law: Insolvency
On 11 November 2022 Mr Justice Zacaroli handed down judgment (available here) in respect of applications for directions by the office-holders of 10 failed energy suppliers.
Read MoreArea of Law: UAE & DIFC Litigation
Zoe O’Sullivan KC and Gregor Hogan acted in the DIFC Court for the successful respondent in Al Buhaira National Insurance Co v Horizon Energy LLC CFI 098/2021 (9 November 2022), obtaining the dismissal of Al Buhaira’s application for an anti-suit injunction preventing Horizon from pursuing parallel proceedings in Sharjah. This important judgment contains valuable consideration of the role of comity when the DIFC Court is called upon to address conflicts of jurisdiction between the different courts of the UAE.
Read MoreArea of Law: Private Client Trusts and Probate
The Privy Council today handed down a landmark judgment in trusts law in the cases of ITG Ltd v Fort Trustees Ltd and Equity Trust (Jersey) Ltd v Halabi, holding that a trustee’s right of indemnity gives them a proprietary interest in the trust assets which survives cessation of trusteeship, but, by a 4 to 3 majority and allowing the appeals, that, if the trust assets are insufficient to satisfy the claims of all trustees, the liens of the trustees rank pari passu among themselves rather than on a first in time basis.
Read More
