‘Ben Norton considers the meaning of “deliberate”, “concealment” and “breach of duty” under s.32 Limitation Act 1980 in the context of the Consumer Credit Act’s unfair relationship provisions following Canada Square Operations Ltd v Potter.’
Henderson Chambers, 19th March 2021
Source: www.hendersonchambers.co.uk
‘Inquests are valuable to insurers as Neil Ward explains. They offer a unique opportunity to hear evidence on all of the key issues which are likely to arise in determining liability arising out of any claim following a death.’
Mills & Reeve, 13th April 2021
Source: www.mills-reeve.com
‘The extent to which losses caused by cyber attacks are covered by law firms’ professional indemnity insurance (PII) policies is to be clarified by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA).’
Legal Futures, 14th April 2021
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘Personal injury lawyers have warned that the UK government’s decision to ditch a European ruling on private land vehicles risks sacrificing the rights of injured people “in the name of Brexit”.’
Law Society's Gazette, 1st March 2021
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘The continuing impact of the Covid-19 pandemic is slowly but surely beginning to cast a shadow over personal injury claims. As the months have rolled on, viable businesses, starved of custom, are facing the prospect of being forced to cease trading. Those same businesses are the Defendants in many ongoing and pending claims. So, what happens when a Defendant becomes insolvent?’
St John's Chambers, February 2021
Source: stjohnsbuildings.com
‘Employment tribunals were intended when first introduced in 1963 to be easily accessible, simple, and straightforward but have gradually taken on more of the appearance of courts. There was a somewhat naive belief in the beginning that justice in such tribunals could be achieved without the parties needing lawyers. The presiding officer was called a chair but is now a judge. And tribunals of course now deal with cases of great complexity, recondite legal areas and with millions at stake. A continuing fundamental difference from a court, however, is that the tribunal has no inherent jurisdiction but only what the dizzying array of statutes provide them.’
Littleton Chambers, 5th February 2021
Source: littletonchambers.com
‘In this post, Neil Newing and Olivia Flasch who both practice at Signature Litigation, comment upon the decision handed down by the UK Supreme Court in the matter of Halliburton Company v Chubb Bermuda Insurance Ltd (Formerly known as Ace Bermuda Insurance Ltd) [2020] UKSC 48. They ask: is the decision a missed opportunity?’
UKSC Blog, 2nd February 2021
Source: ukscblog.com
‘An experienced solicitor who failed to disclose two counsel’s opinions on a case to an after-the-event (ATE) insurer, one of them assessing chances of success at less than 50%, has been fined £8,000.’
Litigation Futures, 27th January 2021
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘In R (on the application of (1) Aviva Insurance Ltd (2) Swiss Reinsurance Company Ltd) v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2021] EWHC 30 (Admin), Henshaw J dealt with certain consequential matters arising from his earlier judgment dated 20 November 2020 which arose from the Claimants’ challenge to the onerous consequences of the Compensation Recovery Unit scheme, particularly in cases involving long-tail asbestos-related diseases.’
Ropewalk Chambers, 18th January 2021
Source: www.ropewalk.co.uk
‘This short note summarises the key parts of the Supreme Court’s decision in this important test case, by which it allowed most of the FCA’s appeals against the decision of the Divisional Court and found largely in favour of policyholders.’
St John's Chambers, 21st January 2021
Source: www.stjohnschambers.co.uk
‘In March 2020, the UK Government began to take a series of measures to combat the transmission of COVID-19. The present appeals considered the impact of these actions and measures on 28 clauses in the 21 lead policies written by the Appellant Insurers.’
UKSC Blog, 15th January 2021
Source: ukscblog.com
‘Judgment in an urgent test case to determine whether businesses hit by Covid-19 will receive insurance pay-outs will not be handed down by the Supreme Court until January at the earliest. Five Supreme Court justices heard a case between the Financial Conduct Authority and six insurance companies in November. The dispute concerned business interruption insurance (BII) and the court was asked to rule on provisions in insurance policies relating to disease clauses, prevention of access clauses and hybrid clauses.’
Law Society's Gazette, 15th December 2020
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘As many as 3,000 law firms could be forced to close or merge over the next few years after the conveyancing bubble bursts and the recession really kicks in, a leading law firm consultant has warned.’
Legal Futures, 8th December 2020
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘In the eagerly awaited judgment in Enka Insaat Ve Sanayi AS v OOO Insurance Company Chubb [2020] UKSC 38, the Supreme Court finally settled an important issue in the law of arbitration that has long divided the authorities and commentary: in the absence of a choice by the parties, where the law applicable to the main contract differs from that of the seat, it is the law of the seat that governs the validity and scope of the arbitration agreement. Our Overview on the decision sets out the key holdings; Part I (below) of our commentary on the decision examines the reasoning of the Majority in greater depth.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 2nd December 2020
Source: hardwicke.co.uk
‘The Supreme Court has unanimously dismissed this appeal addressing when an arbitrator should make disclosure of circumstances which may give rise to justifiable doubts as to his impartiality.’
UKSC Blog, 27th November 2020
Source: ukscblog.com
‘R (o.t.a of Aviva & Swiss Re) v. Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2020] EWHC 3118 (Admin). At first sight, a rather abstruse dispute, but the 63 page judgment of Henshaw J gives rise to a host of important and difficult human rights points. But his central conclusion is that a statute which was not challengeable at the time of its enactment became so, because of the subsequent evolution of the law, principally common law, to the detriment of insurers.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 25th November 2020
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘The court held that whereas reasonable grounds for suspecting someone has committed an offence sets a low evidential hurdle, the second requirement for an arrest to be lawful (for the Police to prove that there were reasonable grounds to believe the arrest was “necessary”) sets a comparatively high evidential hurdle and the police could not objectively evidence that the arrest was “necessary” when the GP would have been prepared to voluntarily attend the police station and the reasons given by the Police for the “necessity” of arresting the GP were baseless.’
Parklane Plowden Chambers, 11th November 2020
Source: www.parklaneplowden.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025