‘Andrew Butler QC assesses the recent Court of Appeal decision in Quantum Actuarial LLP v Quantum Advisory Ltd [2021] EWCA Civ 227, in which he appeared for the Appellant. The case concerned covenants in restraint of trade, arising in an unusual context.’
Tanfield Chambers, 2nd March 2021
Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk
‘A British businessman has been jailed for three and a half years after being convicted of conspiring to pay huge backhanders in one of the world’s biggest bribery scandals.’
The Guardian, 1st March 2021
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘In the very interesting case of Motacus Constructions Ltd v Paolo Castelli SPA [2021] EWHC 356 (TCC), handed down on 22 February 2021 Judge Hodge QC determined:
“the apparently novel question whether the inclusion within a construction contracts for works in England of an exclusive jurisdiction clause in favour of a foreign court precludes the English court from entertaining proceedings for breach of the term implied by paragraph 23 of the Scheme [i.e. the Scheme for Construction Contracts] that the decision of an adjudicator binds the parties until the final determination of the dispute”.’
39 Essex Chambers, 24th February 2021
Source: www.39essex.com
‘Last Friday Chamberlain J handed down judgment in a challenge concerning the government’s compliance with procurement law and its own transparency guidance in the awarding of goods and services contracts during the COVID-19 pandemic. By reg. 50 of the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care was obliged to send for publication a contract award notice (“CAN”) not later than 30 days after the award of a contract. By its transparency policy and principles it was obliged to publish details of any contract.’
39 Essex Chambers, 23rd February 2021
Source: www.39essex.com
‘This is the first in a series of procurement law judicial review (JR) cases relating to Covid-19 brought by the Good Law Project (GLP) to have reached the judgment stage. The case concerned the (non)publication of contract award notices (CANs) within 30 days under regulation 50 Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (PCR) and of other contract notices and materials within 20 or 90 days under relevant transparency policies.’
Monckton Chambers, 19th February 2021
Source: www.monckton.com
‘The dust is slowly settling over the arguments about how contracts should be interpreted. We know that “this is not a literalist exercise focused solely on a parsing of the wording of the particular clause” and that “[t]extualism and contextualism are not conflicting paradigms in a battle for exclusive occupation of the field of contractual interpretation” (as stated by Lord Hodge in Wood v Capita Insurance Services Ltd). That means the factual background (matrix of fact) and commercial common sense still have a role to play where the plain meaning of the words is not clear (which is usually the reason why there is a dispute in the first place).’
Practical Law: Construction Blog, 23rd February 2021
‘The latest two decisions arising out of the aftermath of the Prestige oil spill in 2002 have shed some light on three major areas of the English law of arbitration. The Commercial Court’s two decisions in London Steam-Ship Owners’ Mutual Insurance Association Ltd v The Kingdom of Spain ([2020] (EWHC 1582) and The London Steam-Ship Owners’ Mutual Insurance Association Ltd v The Kingdom of Spain [2020] (EWHC 1920) provide an insightful analysis into the scope of the so-called “conditional benefit” principle, the powers of an arbitrator to grant injunctive relief and the court’s interpretation of the arbitration exception in the Brussels Recast Regulation.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 17th February 2021
Source: hardwicke.co.uk
‘Local Pensions Partnership Administration Ltd (LPPA) awarded a contract under a framework. Acquila Heywood Ltd (Acquila) issued proceedings challenging the award on various bases. LPPA then withdrew the award decision and replaced it with a second decision in which Acquila was again unsuccessful. Acquila did not issue proceedings in respect of the second decision or amend its existing claim. The court held that the automatic suspension which arose under regulation 95 of the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (PCR 2015), SI 2015/102 only prevented LPPA from awarding the contract pursuant to the first decision. Once that decision had been withdrawn and the bids re-evaluated, it served no further purpose. LLPA was therefore not required to refrain from entering into a contract pursuant to its second decision. LPPA’s application to lift the suspension pursuant to PCR 2015, SI 2015/102, reg 96(1)(a) was unnecessary.’
Henderson Chambers, 9th February 2021
Source: www.hendersonchambers.co.uk
‘On 1 February, AstraZeneca told the EU that it would deliver around 50% of the 80 million COVID-19 vaccine doses that it had previously told the EU for the first quarter of 2021.’
The 36 Group, 10th February 2021
Source: 36group.co.uk
‘The Court of Appeal has overturned the first decision in England and Wales to hold that an expert witness owed a fiduciary duty to their client.’
Litigation Futures, 13th January 2021
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The Law Commission has today [17 December 2020] launched a call for evidence to help ensure that the technology of smart contracts can thrive in England and Wales.’
Law Comission, 17th December 2020
Source: www.lawcom.gov.uk
‘Christmas is on the horizon. It’s necessary, therefore, to ask who’s been naughty and who’s been nice – and how better to do that than by reflecting on the courts’ approach to fraud in adjudications?’
Practical Law: Construction Blog, 9th December 2020
‘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
‘These proceedings related to an adjudicator’s decision dated 27th April 2020 (“the 27th April Decision”) under the Scheme for Construction Contracts (England and Wales) Regulations 1998 as amended (“the Scheme”). Lane End Developments Construction Limited (“Lane End”) was the main contractor on a housing development (“the Development”) and Kingstone Civil Engineering Limited (“Kingstone”) was sub-contracted to carry out enabling works for the Development. On 2nd March 2020, Kingstone issued Interim Payment Application No. 17 in the sum of £356,439.19, but Lane End did not serve a Pay Less Notice nor, until 26th March, did it serve a Payment Notice.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 13th November 2020
Source: hardwicke.co.uk
‘A judge was wrong to rule that solicitors had reached a binding compromise on a piece of litigation, when their correspondence had expressly been “subject to contract”, the Court of Appeal has decided.’
Litigation Futures, 23rd November 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘In Primus International Holding Company & Ors v Triumph Controls – UK Ltd & Anor [2020] EWCA Civ 1228, the Court of Appeal grappled with the proper interpretation of “goodwill” in a commercial contract, considering the natural meaning of “goodwill” in the commercial context and the definition prevalent in accounting practice. The case provides a useful reminder of the approach taken by the courts when construing contracts, highlighting the need for parties to spell out clearly their intended meaning of a term in their contractual agreement if they wish to depart from its ordinary and natural meaning.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 4th November 2020
Source: hardwicke.co.uk
‘The competition watchdog has imposed a £17.9m fine on price comparison site Comparethemarket.com after it found that clauses in its contracts with home insurers broke competition law.’
The Guardian, 19th November 2020
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘The recent decision of the High Court in Winlink Marketing Limited v Liverpool Football Club [2020] EWHC 2271 may have long lasting consequences for agents and intermediaries in facilitating and introducing parties to high-value sponsorship deals.’
2 Hare Court, 2nd November 2020
Source: www.2harecourt.com
‘The coronavirus pandemic has led to ongoing widespread business disruption and closures with a second national lockdown commencing this week. As such, certainty over whether business can bring claims under their business interruption (“BI”) insurance policies could not be more important.’
12 King's Bench Walk, 2nd November 2020
Source: www.12kbw.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2023