‘The Jill Poole Memorial Lecture by the Lord Chief Justice: Keeping commercial law up to date.’
Courts and Tribunals Judiciary, 16th May 2017
Source: www.judiciary.gov.uk
A Question of Taste : T he Supreme Court and the Interpretation of Contracts (PDF)
Speech by Lord Sumption
Harris Society Annual Lecture, Keble College, Oxford, 8th May 2017
Source: www.supremecourt.uk
‘Lord Sumption has called for a return to a more straightforward approach to how judges construct contracts that focuses on the words rather than trying to work out what the parties intended by looking at the surrounding circumstances.’
Litigation Futures, 16th May 2017
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Aggregation clauses are commonly used in professional liability policies and can have a substantial impact on the recoverable damages in a claim. The Supreme Court considered the proper construction of the aggregation clause in the Law Society’s Minimum Terms and Conditions (“the Minimum Terms”) in AIG Europe v Woodman [2017] UKSC 18 and in so doing also provided useful guidance on the approach to be taken to the construction of aggregation clauses more generally.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 12th May 2017
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
‘Business and consumer insurance policyholders may now pursue their insurers in the courts if they do not settle claims within a reasonable amount of time.’
OUT-LAW.com, 8th May 2017
Source: www.out-law.com
‘Blockchain-backed ‘smart contracts’ will be a “game changer” in property transactions, increasing certainty for buyers and sellers as well as speeding up the house-buying process, it has been claimed.’
Legal Futures, 26th April 2017
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘A county council has won an appeal to the First-Tier Tribunal over a decision by the Information Commissioner’s Office that it was not entitled to redact certain information in a variation agreement to a waste disposal contract.’
Local Government Lawyer, 24th April 2017
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘Rochdale BH is a social housing provider (of what was the council’s housing stock). The issue in this case – heard as a preliminary issue – was whether Rochdale BH was a water reseller under the terms of The Water Resale Order 2006 in that charges for water it made as a part of the rent.’
Nearly Legal, 23rd April 2017
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
‘In the recent case of Global Asset Capital Inc and another v Aabar Block S.A.R.L and others [2017] EWCA Civ 37, the Court of Appeal held that the High Court was wrong to find that following a ‘subject to contract’ offer letter, a contract was concluded during a telephone call which was inconsistent with subsequent communications.’
4 KBW, 31st March 2017
Source: www.4kbw.net
‘The correct interpretation of a contract in England and Wales will depend on a range of factors, including the words of the contract and the context in which they are used, according to the UK’s highest court.’
OUT-LAW.com, 3rd April 2017
Source: www.out-law.com
‘Two of the private companies that provide 50% of probation services in England and Wales have confirmed to MPs they will have to consider quitting if a Ministry of Justice review fails to deliver improvements.’
The Guardian, 21st March 2017
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘The decision of the High Court in Microsoft Mobile Oy (Ltd) v Sony offers some helpful guidance as to when a competition law tort claim will be caught by an arbitration clause in a sale or supply agreement.’
Competition Bulletin from Blackstone Chambers, 7th March 2017
Source: www.competitionbulletin.com
‘An after-the-event insurer (ATE) has escaped liability to pay out £320,000 after the High Court found that its insured had breached four conditions precedent in the policy.’
Litigation Futures, 7th March 2017
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘And indeed never authorised the co-purchaser to enter into a contract on her behalf without her consent, did not know that he was entering into a contract, or consent to his doing so on her behalf. That was the remarkable situation in the case of Rabiu v. Marlbray Ltd [2016] 1 WLR 5147. At first blush one might have thought, in line with the decision in Suleman v. Shahsavari [1998] 1 WLR 1181, that in the absence of the signature of one of the co-purchasers, there was no binding contract and that that would be the end of the matter. So the trial judge concluded, but the Court of Appeal held that on the facts of the case the purchaser who had signed had rendered himself liable as between himself and the vendor of the property, notwithstanding the absence of the signature of his co-purchaser. In so doing it distinguished Suleman. The decision of the Court of Appeal, which runs to 111 paragraphs, considers a number of issues and repays careful study. This casenote will consider the questions of the validity of the contract between the vendor and the copurchaser and the formalities required by s.2 of the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989. A second casenote (to follow) will consider whether, on the assumption that there was no valid contract as between the vendor and the co-purchaser (either because the contract had not been signed by the other co-purchaser, or because of want of the formalities required by s.2), the vendor was required to return the co-purchaser’s deposit or could retain it.’
Radcliffe Chambers, February 2017
Source: www.radcliffechambers.com
‘When I first started to move from the research to active case work in respect of timeshare litigation last year, I found that the Opinions which I had to write were extremely long and extremely challenging. In fact, the first two written Opinions exceeded 14,000 words each. If nothing else, the recent long awaited decision in Abbott v RCI Europe (“Abbott”) confirmed that I had not been guilty of narcissistic prolixity.’
Full story (PDF)
Park Square Barristers, 11th January 2017
Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk
‘Commercial litigators regularly encounter disputes which arise from parties’ attempts to renegotiate obligations under written agreements in situations where one party is having difficulty performing as required under the contract.’
Littleton Chambers, 26th January 2017
Source: www.littletonchambers.com
‘As with many insurance policies, the Respondent’s policy with the Appellant insurance company contained a condition precedent requiring the insured to notify its insurer “as soon as possible after the occurrence of any event likely to give rise to a claim”. The Appellant withdrew indemnity to the Respondent in respect of a claim, contending that such condition precedent had not been met.’
Park Square Barristers, 23rd January 2017
Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk
‘Judgment in the case of Kersfield Developments (Bridge Road) Ltd v Bray & Slaughter Ltd, handed down on 19 January 2017, is a new authority in the line of case law providing guidance on the provisions governing interim payments in Construction Contracts in the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996, as amended (“the Act”).’
Hardwicke Chambers, 2nd February 2017
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
‘Changes to the Joint Construction Tribunal (JCT) standard form ‘design and build’ contract introduce new uncertainties for contractors around loss and expense claims, an expert has warned.’
OUT-LAW.com, 24th January 2017
Source: www.out-law.com
‘This was Leeds’ second appeal of a Valuation Tribunal decision on council tax liability. We covered the first High Court appeal here. Full disclosure, I acted for the intervener in this second appeal, the Residential Landlords Association, with Justin Bates (or as it turns out, Bate) as counsel.’
Nearly Legal, 8th December 2016
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025