‘The market of clients using litigation finance through choice rather than necessity – especially companies looking to offload their liability for portfolios of cases – remains “almost entirely unaddressed”, an AIM-listed funder has told investors.’
Litigation Futures, 28th November 2019
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘This is an important Court of Appeal decision concerning Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, s.19(2) and the reasonable sum payable in advance on account of works where the landlord may be able in future to recover some of the costs from a third party.’
Nearly Legal, 12th November 2019
Source: nearlylegal.co.uk
‘Alaina Wadsworth, Ben Brown, Ed Foss and Thomas Pangbourne, who all work within the Insurance & Reinsurance Group at CMS, comment on the decision handed down by the UK Supreme Court on 30 October 2019, in the matter of Travelers Insurance Company Ltd v XYZ [2019] UKSC 48.’
UKSC Blog, 11th November 2019
Source: ukscblog.com
‘Agreements with third-party litigation funders are not damages-based agreements (DBAs), the Competition Appeal Tribunal has ruled.’
Litigation Futures, 4th November 2019
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘This appeal concerned who should pay the legal costs of 426 claimants who successfully sued a medical group for the supply of defective silicone breast implants. It allows the Supreme Court to review the principles concerning third-party costs orders. 426 uninsured claimants applied to the court for an order that Travelers pay their costs. The High Court and Court of Appeal held that Travelers be ordered to pay them, albeit for slightly different reasons. Travelers appealed to the Supreme Court.’
UKSC Blog, 30th October 2019
Source: ukscblog.com
‘A High Court judge has deprecated a claimant’s request for a third party to review a draft judgment so that it could have the chance to pay money to suppress publication.’
Litigation Futures, 31st October 2019
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The Supreme Court has overturned a ruling by the Court of Appeal that the only limit on the court’s discretion to make third-party costs orders against insurers was that it must be exercised justly.’
Litigation Futures, 30th October 2019
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The Competition Appeal Tribunal (“CAT”) has today (28 October 2019) handed down its decision in the Trucks Cartel claims dealing with the funding of the claims.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 28th October 2019
Source: hardwicke.co.uk
‘In the recent case of Willers v Joyce and others an application was brought by the winning party against the losing party’s counsel and solicitor following an unsuccessful claim for malicious prosecution.’
Practical Law Dispute Resolution Blog, 24th October 2019
‘Addlesee v Dentons Europe LLP [2019] EWCA Civ 1600 (2 October 2019) provides a ringing endorsement of the rule ‘once privileged, always privileged’. The Court of Appeal held that the defendant solicitors had a duty to uphold the privilege of a former client even though the former client was a company which had been dissolved. The court also held that the solicitors had acted properly in appearing by counsel to argue that the privilege should be upheld, even though the privilege was not the solicitors’ own privilege, and they did not have instructions from the former client. William Flenley QC, leading Adam Kramer, appeared for the successful solicitors.’
Hailsham Chambers, 7th October 2019
Source: www.hailshamchambers.com
‘For many common lawyers – certainly me – trusts and equity seem exotic things. At one point, I supposed the closest I would get to equity in action was by reading Bleak House, which in length and majesty even rivals some of the equity textbooks. But in this (as many other things) I was proved wrong. One cannot properly understand the law of assignment – a bedrock of the commercial construction lawyer’s practice – without comprehending equitable assignment. And it is at the outer fringes of assignment where one may bump – or even lapse – into trusts.’
Practical Law: Construction Blog, 9th October 2019
‘A court has no power to require Cafcass to appoint one of its officers, whether a children’s guardian or otherwise, to undertake any work with or play any role with a non-subject child, a High Court judge has concluded.’
Local Government Lawyer, 1st Octoer 2019
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘In this case, the UKSC held that courts have an inherent jurisdiction independent of the CPR to order non-party access to court documents under the constitutional principle of open justice. This, however, is to be balanced against both any countervailing interests in refusing access, and the principle of practicality and proportionality.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 28th August 2019
Source: hardwicke.co.uk
‘The Supreme Court has ruled in the case of Cape Intermediate Holdings Ltd v Dring (Asbestos Victims Support Groups Forum UK) [2019] that all courts and tribunals that exercise the judicial power of the state are subject to the ‘open justice’ principle.’
4 KBW, 6th August 2019
Source: www.4kbw.net
‘In a decision described as a “victory for open justice”, the Supreme Court has held that non-parties to litigation are entitled to access certain documents from a trial to which it was not a party.’
UKSC Blog, 5th August 2019
Source: ukscblog.com
‘Campaigners, the media and others who are not parties to court proceedings should be permitted to access court documents as “the default position”, the UK’s highest court has ruled.’
OUT-LAW.com, 1st August 2019
Source: www.pinsentmasons.com
‘In Griffiths v (1) Chief Constable of Suffolk (2) Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust [2018] EWHC 2538 (QB), the High Court dismissed claims that the Chief Constable and the NHS Trust were negligent in breaching their duties of care or had breached human rights.’
UK Police Law Blog, 24th January 2019
Source: ukpolicelawblog.com
‘Another third-party bid to see documents used in a high-profile piece of litigation, this time involving the tobacco industry, has been successful.’
Litigation Futures, 17th January 2019
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The same issues often crop up across an array of regulatory work. Legal professional privilege is the most obvious example, with a number of high profile cases arising out of SFO investigations. A second example concerns the rights of third parties to prevent the publication of adverse comment about them in regulatory reports and decisions (‘Maxwellisation’). In this article, Jamie Smith QC and Helen Evans explain how these two issues have arisen in the context of disciplinary investigations and proceedings undertaken by the Financial Reporting Council (FRC), which plays an important role in the regulation of accountants.’
4 New Square, 11th December 2018
Source: www.4newsquare.com
‘Lessons can be learned in the financial services sector from the rush to update contracts to account for the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) taking effect earlier this year.’
OUT-LAW.com, 2nd November 2018
Source: www.out-law.com
© Inner Temple Library 2025