Expert Analysis

• How Public Filing Pilot Is Influencing Litigation Strategy

  

  The ongoing pilot program that makes it easier for third parties like journalists or academics to obtain court documents used in certain public hearings is reshaping how litigation teams draft skeleton arguments, settle expert evidence, and identify and restrict sensitive material, say lawyers at Greenberg Traurig.

• High Court Ruling Clarifies Limits Of Force Majeure Relief

  

  The High Court's recent decision in ADM Industries v. Inerco Trade determined that an 11-day suspension of ship inspections could qualify as an unforeseeable force majeure event, signaling that a disruption must fall within the bargain a contract struck, and that late notice can put relief at risk, say Kian Mellett and Mark Handley at Duane Morris.

• Vince Data Ruling Offers Route Around Defamation Limits

  

  The recent Court of Appeal ruling in Vince v. Associated Newspapers, concerning misleading headlines, shows how data protection claims may offer redress when defamation law does not, and may pave the way for a shift in focus for claims against publishers, say lawyers at Hamlins.

• Gov't Projects Report Signals Areas Of Dispute Risk

  

  The National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority's recent report assessing major government projects provides an indicator of future contractual and regulatory risks for companies, and of how the increased emphasis on project oversight and early intervention may influence the disputes landscape, says Theresa Mohammed at Watson Farley.

• Series

  Practice Leader Insights From RPC's Simon Hart

  

  Simon Hart, head of RPC's financial services sector, discusses the importance of leading with clear goals and a shared purpose, the challenge of keeping clients focused under sustained pressure, and why junior lawyers should resist the trend to become too specialized early on.

• Top Court's AXA Ruling Sets High Bar To Disapply Test Cases

  

  The Supreme Court's recent decision in AXA Insurance v. Commissioners of Inland Revenue is notable in explaining the court's scope to disapply the binding effect of a group litigation order test case on follower claims, although this remains the exception rather than the rule, say lawyers at King & Spalding.

• Financial Firm Ruling Narrows Push Fraud Recovery Route

  

  The recent Court of Appeal decision in Moorwand v. Hamblin rejected a derivative claim brought by victims of an authorized push payment fraud, clarifying that these claims will only succeed in limited circumstances where a provider is demonstrably put on inquiry for misappropriation, say lawyers at Irwin Mitchell.

• What Meta Damages Ruling Means For Data Abuse Claims

  

  The recent Court of Appeal ruling in Meta v. Gormsen found that user damages might be awarded for abuse of a dominant market position, raising the possibility of a novel type of competition claim against U.K. companies accused of misusing personal data, say lawyers at Macfarlanes.

• 'Peppa Pig' Ruling Broadens Global Copyright Relief

  

  The High Court's recent unusual decision in Hasbro v. Công to grant a panjurisdictional injunction shows that, in certain circumstances, a representative sample of online content may be used in a copyright dispute when a full review would be disproportionate, says Eloise Ryan at Shoosmiths.

• Series

  Practice Leader Insights From Wedlake Bell's Edward Starling

  

  Edward Starling, Wedlake Bell's head of disputes, discusses how he endeavors to empower colleagues to excel, the challenges of improving client delivery and efficiency, and why junior lawyers need to be collaborative, commercial and creative.

• How UK Ship Sale Ruling Expands Lost-Bargain Damages

  

  The U.K. Supreme Court’s recent ruling in Great Asia Maritime v. Orion Shipping – upholding a "loss of bargain" damages award in a disagreement over a vessel sale – sharpens parties’ ability to contractually control damages outcomes in the event of a dispute, say lawyers at Crowell & Moring.

• Ruling On Witness AI Use Sends Lawyers Strong Message

  

  The Court of Appeal's recent decision in R v. FGD clarifies that the requirement to preserve the integrity of evidence given in court extends to the use of artificial intelligence, providing a clear warning to practitioners that coaching witnesses by any means is prohibited, say lawyers at Dechert.

• How AI Can Complicate Liability Limits In Contracts

  

  With the U.K. Jurisdiction Taskforce's recent legal statement on liability for harms confirming that contract clauses remain subject to established norms, AI-drafted limits on liability pose concern, as the wording chosen must account for human definition and interpretation, says solicitor Daniel Erskine.

• 2 ECJ Rulings Give Guidance On Sport Agent Regs

  

  The European Court of Justice recently settled two long-running disputes, Rogon and RRC Sports, by finding that the antitrust rules governing these leagues offer exceptions for regulating players' agents, and offering a path for sports associations to implement rules controlling services ancillary to their sport, say lawyers at Skadden.

• Drug Rulings Clarify Pricing Test And Penalty Reviews

  

  The Court of Appeals’ recent drug price rulings in Pfizer v. Competition and Markets Authority and Auden Mckenzie v. CMA are both notable for how the court settled the legal test for excessive pricing, as well as for how it has restated the Competition Appeal Tribunal’s obligations when reviewing penalties, say lawyers at Wilson Sonsini.