Expert Analysis

• Saxon Woods Ruling Tightens Rules On Director Good Faith

  

  The recent Court of Appeal judgment in Saxon Woods v. Costa departs from the High Court's ruling, clarifying that a director's sincere belief they have acted in the company’s best interests is not sufficient to satisfy the statutory requirement to act in good faith, say lawyers at Covington.

• ICSID Annulment Proceedings Carry High Stakes For System

  

  The annulment proceedings brought by Freeport-McMoRan before the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes, seeking to redress a glaring and prejudicial oversight in its arbitral award against Peru, are significant for delimiting the boundaries of procedural fairness within the ICSID's annulment framework, says Josep Galvez at 4-5 Gray's Inn.

• Key Takeaways As EU And UK Impose New Russia Sanctions

  

  The European Union and U.K.’s new sanctions on Russia, designating increasing numbers of non-Russian companies in the defense and shipping sectors, mean that organizations must examine from the outset whether a transaction has any nexus with the EU or the U.K., say lawyers at Sullivan & Cromwell.

• Decoding Arbitral Disputes: Prestige's Jurisprudential Legacy

  

  The U.K. Supreme Court's recent denial of appeal ended Spain's decades-long quest to enforce an €855 million arbitral judgment against a London insurer, throwing into stark relief the increasingly complex relationship between arbitral sovereignty, foreign state immunity and the shifting terrain of post-Brexit private international law, says Josep Galvez at 4-5 Gray's Inn.

• German Ruling Further Restrains Intra-EU Bilateral Arbitration

  

  The German Federal Court of Justice recently issued a notable ruling that pushes the invalidation of intra-European Union bilateral investment treaty arbitration into the realm of stand-alone cost decisions, strengthening the EU's legal framework while increasing uncertainty for investors in the region, say attorneys at Linklaters.

• High Court Ruling Shows Firm Stance On Procedural Integrity

  

  The recent High Court decision in Qatar Investment v. Phoenix Ancient Art demonstrates its zero tolerance of procedural failure, serving as a reminder that the financial burden associated with document disclosure will not excuse a party’s failure to comply with court orders, say lawyers at Quillon Law.

• A Shifting Landscape Of Greater Scrutiny After Data Breaches

  

  Recent Information Commissioner's Office fines for personal data breaches and a Home Office consultation signal a shift in the U.K. regulatory landscape, and with an increase in mass actions and resulting exposure, organizations should prepare for potential third-party claims from those incurring consequential losses, say lawyers at Atheria.

• Decoding Arbitral Disputes: An Update On ICSID Annulment

  

  The International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes' recent decision in Peteris Pildegovics and SIA North Star v. Kingdom of Norway offers a reasoned and principled contribution to annulment jurisprudence, effectively balancing the competing imperatives of fairness, finality and institutional coherence, says Josep Galvez at 4-5 Gray's Inn.

• UK Data Disputes Could Become Competition Class Actions

  

  While mass data protection claims have chafed against the procedural restrictions that apply to class actions under U.K. law, it is possible these claims will be brought into the fold of the rapidly growing Competition Appeal Tribunal scene, says Aislinn Kelly-Lyth at Blackstone Chambers.

• Russia Sanctions Spotlight: Divergent Approaches Emerge

  

  With indications of greater divergence and uncertainty in Russia sanctions policy between the U.K., European Union and U.S., there are four general principles and a range of compliance steps that businesses should bear in mind when assessing the impact of a potentially shifting landscape, says Alexandra Melia at Steptoe.

• Opinion

  UK Court Of Appeal's FRAND Ruling Is Troubling

  

  The U.K. Court of Appeal's recent decision in Optis v. Apple disregards a lower court's extensive factual findings and contradicts its own precedent regarding fair, reasonable and nondiscriminatory terms for cellular patents, says Enrico Bonadio at the University of London.

• What Santander Fraud Ruling Means For UK Banking Sector

  

  A London court's recent judgment in Santander v. CCP Graduate School held that a bank does not owe any duty to third-party victims of authorized push payment fraud, reaffirming the steps banks are already taking to protect their own customers from sophisticated fraud mechanisms, say lawyers at Charles Russell.

• Arbitral Ruling In EU Fisheries Clash Clarifies Post-Brexit Pact

  

  The Permanent Court of Arbitration's recent ruling marks a pivotal moment in the evolving jurisprudence surrounding the Trade and Cooperation Agreement, concluded between the U.K. and the EU after Brexit, and sets an important precedent for interpretation and enforcement of trade and environment clauses in cross-border disputes, says Josep Galvez at 4-5 Gray's Inn.

• Apple Ruling Provides Clarity For UK Litigation Funders

  

  The Court of Appeal's recent Gutmann v. Apple decision that litigation funders can take a fee before class action members are paid helps relieve the concerns of insufficient funding returns that followed news of a broad sector review and a key high court ruling, says Matthew Lo at Exton Advisors.

• FCA Update Eases Private Stock Market Disclosure Rules

  

  The Financial Conduct Authority’s recently updated proposals for the Private Intermittent Securities and Capital Exchange System would result in less onerous disclosure obligations for businesses, reflecting ongoing efforts to balance an attractive trading venue for private companies while maintaining sufficient investor protections, say lawyers at Debevoise.