Expert Analysis

• What French Watchdog Ruling Means For M&A Landscape

  

  Although ultimately dismissed due to lack of evidence, the French competition authority’s recent post-closing review of several nonreportable mergers is a landmark case that highlights the increased complexity of such transactions, and is further testament to the European competition authorities’ willingness to expand their toolkit to address below-threshold M&As, say lawyers at Cleary.

• How Life Science Companies Are Approaching UPC Opt-Outs

  

  A look at recent data shows that one year after its launch, the European Union's Unified Patent Court is still seeing a high rate of opt-outs, including from large U.S.-based life science companies wary of this unpredictable court — and there are reasons this strategy should largely remain the same, say Sanjay Murthy and Christopher Tuinenga at McAndrews Held.

• New Directors' Code Of Conduct May Serve As Useful Guide

  

  Although the Institute of Directors’ current proposal for a voluntary code of conduct is strongly supported by its members, it must be balanced against the statutory requirement for directors to promote their company’s success, and the risk of claims by shareholders if their decisions are influenced by wider social considerations, says Matthew Watson at RPC.

• Lego Ruling Builds Understanding Of Design Exam Process

  

  In Lego v. Guangdong Loongon, the European Union Intellectual Property Office recently invalidated a registered design for a toy figure, offering an illustrative guide to assessing the individual character of a design in relation to a preexisting design, says Christoph Moeller at Mewburn Ellis.

• Contractual Drafting Takeaways From Force Majeure Ruling

  

  Lawyers at Cleary discuss the U.K. Supreme Court's recent judgment RTI v. MUR Shipping and its important implications, including how the court approached the apparent tension between certainty and commercial pragmatism, and considerations for the drafting of force majeure clauses going forward.

• Behind The Stagecoach Boundary Fare Dispute Settlement

  

  The Competition Appeal Tribunal's recent rail network boundary fare settlement offers group action practitioners some much-needed guidance as it reduces the number of remaining parties' five-year dispute from two to one, says Mohsin Patel at Factor Risk Management.

• The Unified Patent Court: What We Learned In Year 1

  

  ​​​​​​​The Unified Patent Court celebrated its first anniversary this month, and while questions remain as we wait for the first decisions on the merits, a multitude of decisions and orders regarding provisional measures and procedural aspects have provided valuable insights already, says Antje Brambrink at Finnegan.

• Decoding Arbitral Disputes: Spanish Judicial Oversight

  

  The recent conviction of arbitrator Gonzalo Stampa underscores the critical importance of judicial authority in the realm of international arbitration in Spain, and emphasizes that arbitrators must respect the procedural frameworks established by Spanish national courts, says Josep Galvez at 4-5 Gray’s Inn.

• F1 Driver AI Case Sheds Light On Winning Tactics In IP Suits

  

  A German court recently awarded damages to former F1 driver Michael Schumacher's family in an artificial intelligence dispute over the unlicensed use of his image, illustrating how athletes are using the law to protect their brands, and setting a precedent in other AI-generated image rights cases, William Bowyer at Lawrence Stephens.

• High Court Ruling Sheds Light On Targets For Judicial Review

  

  The High Court's recent dismissal of iDealing.com's judicial review application for service complaint decisions by the Financial Ombudsman Service highlights the difficulty of distinguishing what decisions are amenable to judicial review, demonstrating that those made by statutory bodies may not always be genuine targets, say Alexander Fawke, Tara Janus and Bam Thomas at Linklaters.

• Appeal Ruling Clarifies 3rd-Party Contract Breach Liability

  

  The Court of Appeal's recent decision in Northamber v. Genee World serves as a warning to parties that they may be held liable for inducing another party to breach a contract, even if that party was a willing participant, say Neil Blake, Maura McIntosh and Jennifer O'Brien at HSL.

• CPR Proposal Affirms The Emphasis On Early Mediation

  

  While the recent proposal to incorporate mandatory alternative dispute resolution into the Civil Procedure Rules following a 2023 appeal decision would not lead to seismic change, given current practice, it signals a shift in how litigation should be pursued toward out-of-court solutions, say Heather Welham and Cyra Roshan at Foot Anstey.

• How Law Firms Can Handle Challenges Of Mass Claims

  

  With a wave of volume litigation possibly about to hit the U.K. courts, firms developing mass claim practices should ensure they heed the Solicitors Regulation Authority's May warning and adopt strategies to ensure regulatory compliance and fair client representation, says Claire Van der Zant at Shieldpay.

• Potential EPO Reproducibility Ruling May Affect IP Strategies

  

  A potential European Patent Office decision in referral G1/23, concerning the reproducibility criteria for patenting commercial products, may affect how disclosures are assessed as prior art and could influence how companies weigh protecting innovations as trade secrets versus patents, says Michael Stott at Mathys & Squire.

• Insurance Ruling Stresses High Hurdle To Fix Policy Wording

  

  In Project Angel v. Axis, the Court of Appeal recently refused to rewrite the exclusion clause of an insurance policy, reminding parties in the warranty and indemnity market to carefully word clauses, as there is a high threshold before courts will intervene to amend policies, say Joseph Moore and Laura McCann at Travers Smith.