"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: Company
In a judgment handed down this morning, Deputy (former Chief) Master Marsh dismissed an application for summary judgment made by Dr Rohit Kulkarni, a consultant orthopaedic surgeon who is a minority shareholder in the company which owns St Joseph’s Hospital in Newport, Gwent. The summary judgment application, which has been issued before the defendants had filed defences, was based in part on the compulsory share transfer provisions of a shareholders’ agreement between Dr Kulkarni and the majority shareholder, Gwent Holdings Limited. Dr Kulkarni claimed that Gwent had committed irremediable breaches of the shareholders’ agreement, thus triggering the compulsory transfer provisions. In his judgment in Kulkarni v Gwent Holdings Limited and St Joseph's Independent Hospital Limited [2022] EWHC 1368 (Ch), Deputy Master Marsh refused to order the rectification of the company’s register of members under section 125 of the Companies Act 2006 with retrospective effect. He went on to refuse to grant relief entitling Dr Kulkarni to acquire Gwent’s shares compulsorily, noting at [92] that “the issue of remediability is unlikely to be suitable for determination in most cases on a summary basis because, as in this case, the court does not have all the evidence it needs to make a determination about the proper construction of the contract and whether on the specific facts the breach was remediable”.
Read MoreArea of Law: Charities
On 27 May 2022, The Supreme Court granted permission to appeal to the London Borough of Merton Council from the decision of the Court of Appeal in Nuffield Health v Merton [2022] Ch 1.
Read MoreArea of Law: Intellectual Property
Michael Edenborough KC and Stephanie Wickenden (assisted by Stefano Braschi at trial and Anneliese Mondschein on appeal) acted for easyGroup in a case where for the first time a defendant was held liable for using a non-orange Sign in relation to non-travel services. Permission to appeal to the CoA has been granted on two other points.
Read MoreArea of Law: Intellectual Property
Michael Edenborough KC leading outside junior counsel acted for the successful appellants on whether certain advertisements and offers for sale on amazon.com targeted the UK and the EU. The result meant that certain advertisements on the amazon.com site were held to constitute use of the infringing signs within the UK / EU27. Further, sales from the amazon.com site to customers located in the UK / EU27 also constituted actionable use. This result has far reaching consequences on how internet businesses who have customers located in several countries need to conduct their trade in those various jurisdictions. The Supreme Court heard Amazon’s appeal in November 2023.
Read MoreArea of Law: Intellectual Property
Thomas Elias and John Eldridge appeared against each other in an IP licensing case concerning literary works posted on a website.
Read MoreArea of Law: Intellectual Property
Michael Edenborough KC acted pro bono publico in this case that dealt with the hitherto unresolved point about the assignment of the legal and equitable interest in an invention, prior to it being encapsulated in a patent application.
Read MoreArea 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 MoreArea of Law: Intellectual Property
Michael Edenborough KC appeared in the appeal to the General Court on whether it was permissible to re-orientate figurative marks to increase the likelihood of confusion.
Read MoreArea of Law: UAE & DIFC Litigation
Zoe O’Sullivan KC and Gregor Hogan acted for the successful claimants in the first Dubai International Financial Centre Court case to establish definitively that the DIFC Court has jurisdiction to grant freezing and asset disclosure orders in support of foreign proceedings: Lateef v Liela [ARB 17 2020], 13 December 2021.
Read MoreArea of Law: Commercial Litigation
The Court of Appeal has today handed down an important judgment on committal applications in Navigator Equities Limited and Vladimir Chernukhin v Oleg Deripaska [2021] EWCA Civ 1799. The court set aside the order of Andrew Baker J (striking out the committal application against Mr Deripaska as an abuse of process) and has remitted the matter back to the Commercial Court for trial.
Read MoreArea of Law: Company
The Court of Appeal has handed down a second judgment in the case of Loveridge v Loveridge [2021] EWCA Civ 1697. Lance Ashworth QC and Dan McCourt Fritz (instructed by Stephen Rome and Georgia Morris at Thursfields Solicitors) were again successful. The judgment contains an interesting discussion about the proper treatment of informal loan finance within family companies, the outer limits of the unfair prejudice jurisdiction under ss.994-996 of the Companies Act 2006, and on the costs consequences of abortive committal applications.
Read MoreArea of Law: Intellectual Property
In this case, Thomas Braithwaite blended IP and company law when he appeared in the IPEC for the defendants who were accused of breach of a trade mark licence. A summary judgment application was defeated on the grounds that the claimant arguably did not have good title to the trade mark, having acquired it by way of an unlawful return of capital and disguised distribution by a company to its shareholder.
Read MoreArea of Law: Intellectual Property
Stephanie Wickenden acted as sole counsel for the successful appellants in the Court of Appeal that created new precedent in respect of solicitors’ conflicts. The Appellants/Defendants’ solicitors previously acted for another defendant in a case brought by the same claimant where the facts had some overlap, and which was resolved by a confidential mediation. The Court found that the principles to be applied were not the same as those in former clients, but that there was a potential for a conflict of duties owing to the confidential information received through the previous mediation. On the facts, the solicitors had not breached any duty as they had implemented an appropriate information barrier.
Read MoreArea of Law: Intellectual Property
Michael Edenborough KC appeared in the appeal to the High Court on the validity of the Babybel red colour trade mark.
Read MoreArea of Law: Intellectual Property
Michael Edenborough KC successfully maintained the registration of a 3D trade mark for a glass bottle in the shape of a human skull. This bottle and that of a competitor are shown in the banner at the top of this section.
Read MoreArea of Law: Intellectual Property
Michael Edenborough QC appeared in the appeal to the General Court on whether a comma could save an application from offending against article 7(1)(c).
Read MoreArea of Law: Private Client Trusts and Probate
An award under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 can include a lump sum to enable the claimant to discharge all or part of a success fee payable under a CFA.
Read MoreArea of Law: Private Client Trusts and Probate
Andrew Francis acted for the Applicant in an application to modify a restrictive covenant in Ealing, West London, and succeeded on payment of compensation to the objectors. The decision is significant in terms of:
Read MoreArea of Law: International and Offshore
Elizabeth Jones QC, Justin Higgo QC, Gareth Tilley, Paul Adams, Zahler Bryan, and Oliver Jones continue to act for Kea Investments in the ongoing litigation against Eric Watson, following the substantial judgment obtained against Mr Watson for deceit and breach of fiduciary duty in 2018. This year resulted in notable decisions on the circumstances in which a defendant can have resort to assets subject to a freezing or proprietary injunction when there is an unsatisfied judgment debt ([2020] EWHC 472 (Ch)), a judgment creditor’s right to be subrogated to the position of a bank that had used money held on trust for the judgment creditor to satisfy debts of its customer, the judgment debtor ([2020] EWHC 309 (Ch)) and, in a judgment reaffirming the risk taken by litigants who deliberately breach court orders, Mr Watson was committed to prison for 4 months for failing to disclose assets which were made available for his use ([2020] EWHC 2599 (Ch); [2020] EWHC 2796 (Ch)). Mr Watson’s application to stay the committal order was refused.
Read MoreArea of Law: International and Offshore
Dakis Hagen QC (assisted by Emma Hargreaves) acts for the Plaintiffs and Jonathan Adkin QC (assisted by Adil Mohamedbhai) acts for the Defendant trustee in Wong & Anor v Grand View Private Trust Company Ltd, a claim to recover substantial trust property transferred to a trustee of a purpose trust. The Plaintiffs succeeded in obtaining summary judgment at first instance on the ground that powers of addition and exclusion cannot be exercised in a manner which alters or destroys the substratum of the trust ([2019] SC (Bda) 37 Com (5 June 2019)), but this was overturned by the Bermuda Court of Appeal in April 2020 (Civil Appeal No. 5A of 2019, 20 April 2020). Richard Wilson QC (assisted by James Weale) acts for Tony Wang, an intervenor in the appeal. The Plaintiffs and Tony Wang have each been granted leave to appeal to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.
Read MoreArea of Law: Banking and Financial Services
Philip Marshall QC, Jonathan Harris QC (Hon.) and James Mather are acting for Abu Dhabi Commercial Bank in State of Qatar v Emirates NBD Bank, one of the largest claims to be brought in the English High Court, in which claims are brought against the bank by the State of Qatar in conspiracy said to arise out of an alleged international scheme to manipulate the value of Qatari currency and bonds connected with the so-called ‘blockade’ of Qatar by neighbouring Gulf states causing the Qatari Central Bank to have to deposit US$13 billion.
Read MoreArea of Law: Civil Fraud
Philip Marshall QC and Matthew Morrison continue to act for Business Energy Solutions (BES) in respect of proceedings arising from the obtaining and execution of search warrants, and an ongoing trading standards investigation into BES’s affairs. The claims, which seek damages for misfeasance in public office and just satisfaction under the Human Rights Act 1998, raise novel points of public and private law including immunity from suit. The 12-day trial commences in November 2021.
Read MoreArea of Law: Civil Fraud
Philip Jones QC and Hugh Norbury QC are each instructed on behalf of separate Defendants in the major commercial fraud case of Vale v Steinmetz & Ors, arising out of a failed mining joint venture in Guinea. The claim is for nearly US$2 billion.
Read MoreArea of Law: Arbitration
In Cesfin Ventures LLC v Ghaith Al Qubaisi, Rupert Reed KC and Gregor Hogan obtained a worldwide freezing order in the Chancery Division against a director and shareholder of a UAE conglomerate in support of New York proceedings against him as “alter ego” of the UAE holding company, alternatively in setting aside fraudulent transfer to himself and others of company assets to frustrate enforcement of the award rendered in an ICC arbitration seated in New York.
Read MoreArea of Law: Commercial Litigation
Jonathan Adkin QC, Sophie Holcombe, and Jamie Randall act on behalf of the former Prime Minister of Georgia and his family as beneficiaries of a Singapore Trust in Ivanishvili, Bidzina and others v Credit Suisse Trust Ltd [2020] SGCA 62. Claims have been commenced against Credit Suisse entities for losses arising from the mismanagement of an investment portfolio said to be worth over US$1bn. In July 2020 the Singapore Court of Appeal dismissed Credit Suisse Trust’s jurisdiction challenge, bringing an end to a long-running jurisdiction battle.
Read MoreArea of Law: Civil Fraud
Lance Ashworth QC acts for the claimant in Kelly v Baker & Braid, a commercial court claim for damages for fraudulent misrepresentation and/or breach of fiduciary duty leading to the sale of a group of companies at an undervalue of over £110m.
Read MoreArea of Law: Private Client Trusts and Probate
John Machell QC acts for the appellants in ITG Limited v Glennalla Properties Limited in an appeal to the Privy Council. The case concerns issues relating to the insolvency of trusts including the priority between the indemnity claims of successive trustees, and between trustees and outside creditors.
Read MoreArea of Law: Property
Amy Proferes acts for the First and Second Defendants in Toner v Telford Homes & Ors, a claim regarding a flat purchased off-plan. The claimant seeks rescission, damages and other remedies against 6 defendants including the developer, the property manager and the current freeholder, on the basis of misrepresentation, breach of contract, fraud, negligence and harassment. The case raises questions which will be of importance to developers selling properties off plan as to representations made in sales models and brochures, as well as how (and whether) developers can protect themselves from such claims by means of disclaimers and/or contractual terms. Judgment is currently awaited on applications by the First to Fourth Defendants seeking summary judgment and/or strike out of the claim.
Read MoreArea of Law: Civil Fraud
Lance Ashworth QC and Matthew Morrison are acting for the claimants in Wellcourt Investment Corp v Propfurn Ltd, a claim in connection with a £100m property portfolio in London, owned by BVI and Liberian companies. They have so far successfully obtained recovery of all monies held by the former agents of the claimants.
Read MoreArea of Law: Banking and Financial Services
Lance Ashworth QC acts for the claimant in Grove Park Properties v Royal Bank of Scotland, which is due for a 10-day Commercial Court trial in January 2021, in which it is alleged that the defendant bank fraudulently amended a loan agreement to halve the term of the loan.
Read MoreArea of Law: Property
Thomas Braithwaite, acting for the Crown Estate Commissioners, successfully defeated an adverse claim to part of the North Norfolk coast. The case addressed the principles of accretion and avulsion, and the presumption of Crown ownership of the foreshore (Bett & Gethin v Crown Estate (FTT, REF/2017/0591)).
Read MoreArea of Law: Civil Fraud
John Machell QC acts for the claimants in Circumference v Martin in which the Claimants claim an entitlement to rescind a share purchase agreement for fraudulent misrepresentation.
Read MoreArea of Law: Property
In Kelleher v Castlebourne Homes (Rock) Ltd [2020] (High Court, Bodmin District Registry) Andrew Bruce represented the Defendant developers in a dispute about the width of a strip of land and easement at a site in Trebetherick, Cornwall. The trial took place over a week entirely remotely in Summer 2020 and involved detailed consideration of historic conveyances, numerous plans and various aerial photographs, together with contested expert surveying evidence. HHJ Carr’s judgment paid tribute to the quality of the submissions.
Read MoreArea of Law: Civil Fraud
Hugh Norbury QC has been involved in the English leg of China Metals v Chun, a large international fraud case relating to the alleged misappropriation of assets in China / Hong Kong. Hugh is acting for the daughters of the alleged fraudster in relation to a proprietary injunction over valuable assets that they hold in London.
Read MoreIn Dunmoore (West London) Ltd v Vanessa Donegan [2020] (Upper Tribunal Lands Chamber), Andrew Bruce acted for the Objector on an application to modify a restrictive covenant under s.84(1)(aa) of the Law of Property Act 1925. The Applicants were constructing an industrial park on agricultural land near Billingshurst, Sussex and sought to modify a covenant which prevented any building on a buffer zone of 200’ from the boundary of the Objector’s (extensive and valuable) home. The application was settled the last working day before the Upper Tribunal hearing on commercial terms.
Read MoreArea of Law: Civil Fraud
In Equity Real Estate (Bracknell) Ltd & Ors v Capstan Capital Partners LLP & Ors, Justin Higgo QC and Stephanie Thompson are representing five SPVs who are the apparent victims of a substantial property investment fraud. They have so far obtained extensive disclosure from third parties under the Bankers Trust, Norwich Pharmacal, and pre-action disclosure jurisdictions.
Read MoreArea of Law: Civil Fraud
Hugh Norbury QC is instructed on behalf of corporate and individual trustee and director defendants in Ballacorey What v Brown and Ors, a fraud claim issued in the Isle of Man arising out of a relationship between investment managers in the GEM financial management business.
Read MoreArea of Law: International and Offshore
In Credit Europe Bank (Dubai) Ltd v. (1) NMC Trading LLC (2) NMC Healthcare LLC (3) Bavaguthu Raghuram Shetty [2020] DIFC CFI 031, Rupert Reed KC and Gregor Hogan acted for the major Dutch Bank, CEBD, to obtaining a worldwide freezing order against Dr BR Shetty, founder of the troubled NMC Group. The decision also confirmed that an applicant need not demonstrate any assets of the respondent in the jurisdiction of the DIFC to obtain a worldwide freezing order. Rupert and Gregor represented CEBD at the trial of its claim against Dr Shetty in September 2021.
Read MoreArea of Law: Property
In Wickers v Humbles, Philip Jones QC and Gregor Hogan continue to act for the directors of a property development company in a dispute arising from the impact of the global financial crisis on a super-prime property development in London. The case is expected to proceed to a six-week trial in the Isle of Man in late 2021 or 2022.
Read MoreArea of Law: Civil Fraud
In Federal Republic of Nigeria v Tibit, Timothy Collingwood QC acts for the defendant company in an action in the BVI brought on behalf of the Government of Nigeria to recover funds which it is claimed were appropriated by corrupt former officials and used to purchase an executive jet.
Read More
