Dispute Resolution

Subscribe to Dispute Resolution RSS Feed

WHO PAYS THE PRICE OF AUTHORISED PUSH PAYMENT FRAUD?

Following on from our recent Blog post about UK Finance’s half-yearly fraud update, in an article published today with the International Banker we look at the increasingly common authorised push payment (APP) fraud and consider what can be done and who might be liable?… Continue Reading

UK Finance – Fraud Update

By Ian Debbage on October 27, 2023 Posted in Banking, Dispute Resolution, Fraud and Financial Crime

UK Finance has recently published its half yearly fraud update for the first half of 2023, its findings are based on data reported to it by its members, which include financial providers, credit, debit and charge card issuers and card payment acquirers.… Continue Reading

Opening salvo – enforceability of litigation funding agreements in a post-PACCAR world?

By Christian Toms on October 23, 2023 Posted in Contracts and Agreements, Dispute Resolution, Litigation Funding, Regulation

The recent interim judgment of Therium Litigation Funding A IC v Bugsby Property LLC [2023] EWHC 2627 (Comm) appears to give us an early indication of what might become key battlegrounds between Third-Party Funders and certain funded litigants in the wake of the Supreme Court’s impactful determination in R (PACCAR) v Competition Appeal Tribunal [2023] … Continue Reading

Push-ed Back – Supreme Court Considers Quincecare Duty for Authorised Push Payment (“APP”) Fraud Victims

By Chris Webber, Katherine Wakeham and Assad Bishara on July 17, 2023 Posted in Banking, Dispute Resolution, Fraud and Financial Crime

On 12 July 2023, the Supreme Court delivered its widely anticipated judgment in Philipp v Barclays Bank UK PLC. In doing so, the Court has gone back to basics to explain the basis for and scope of a bank’s duty to its customers, and has brought the Quincecare duty back to a narrower footing. By … Continue Reading

Financial Ombudsman Service compensation limit increased again – by more than 10%

By Chris Webber and Maria Shorter on April 21, 2023 Posted in Dispute Resolution

The Financial Conduct Authority confirmed last month that the limit for compensation that can be awarded by the Financial Ombudsman Service (“FOS”) will be raised from £375,000 to £415,000, for complaints made after 1 April 2023 relating to acts or omissions on or after 1 April 2019 – an increase of over 10%. A lower … Continue Reading

You’ve been served…well, virtually.

By Chris Webber, Katherine Wakeham and Assad Bishara on September 1, 2022 Posted in Crypto-Assets, Dispute Resolution

In what is widely touted as the first of its kind in the UK, a recent order made in D’Aloia v Persons Unknown & Others by the High Court marks an expansion of the potential methods for service of claims permitted for English proceedings, by allowing proceedings to be served via airdrop of Non-Fungible Token … Continue Reading

Compulsory ADR – Coming soon to a dispute near you?

By Chris Webber and Katherine Wakeham on August 9, 2021 Posted in Dispute Resolution

Alternative dispute resolution (or “ADR”) has long played an important role in dispute resolution. A recent report by the Civil Justice Council (the “Report”), commissioned to consider the legality and desirability of making ADR compulsory, could see ADR playing an even more prominent role in future.… Continue Reading

Public Policy Defence against Foreign Money Judgment Fails

By Natasha Somi on June 24, 2020 Posted in Dispute Resolution

Earlier this month, in Lenkor Energy Trading Dmcc (“Lenkor“) v Puri (“Mr Puri“) [2020] EWHC 1432 the High Court upheld an order granting summary judgment in favour of Lenkor in relation to a debt owed to it by Mr Puri under a Dubai judgment. Mr Puri’s argument that illegality tainting the underlying transaction made enforcement … Continue Reading

Court of Appeal confirms that Bolkiah principle does not apply to former opponent cases

By Squire Patton Boggs on May 19, 2020 Posted in Dispute Resolution

The Court of Appeal has recently confirmed in Glencairn IP Holdings Ltd and another v Product Specialities Inc and others [2020] EWCA Civ 609 that the Bolkiah principle will only apply where a former client of a firm of solicitors alleges that a new client has an adverse interest to it. Therefore, a firm of … Continue Reading

The never ending story? Allianz pushes back on JD Williams’ counterclaim over PPI damages

By Natasha Somi on April 23, 2020 Posted in Dispute Resolution

Away from COVID-19, in a claim going through the High Court, Allianz Insurance PLC (“Allianz“) v. J.D. Williams & Co. Ltd. (“JDW“), Allianz has contested JDW’s attempt to counterclaim for PPI pay-outs it made to customers.… Continue Reading

COVID-19 and the Courts

By Chris Webber and Katherine Wakeham on April 2, 2020 Posted in Dispute Resolution

Whilst we all try to settle in to our new working from home routines, and maintain social distancing measures, the civil justice system is also having to find ways to adapt. Early messages from Court system that it would be ‘business as usual’ quickly proved impossible; but over the past week there have been procedures … Continue Reading

High Court finds Genworth Financial Inc. liable for 90% of AXA’s PPI misselling losses

By Mariyam Harunah on December 16, 2019 Posted in Dispute Resolution

Last week, the High Court found Genworth Financial Inc. (“Genworth“), liable to pay losses to AXA in the potential sum of £265 million, in respect of compensation that AXA had paid to settle payment protection insurance (“PPI“) misselling claims against two Genworth subsidiaries that were acquired by AXA.… Continue Reading

Watch out! Communications referenced/reproduced in settlement agreements might lose without prejudice or litigation privilege from production

By Squire Patton Boggs on December 5, 2019 Posted in Dispute Resolution

In BGC Brokers LP & others v Tradition (UK) Ltd & others, the Court of Appeal dismissed BGC Brokers LP’s (“Claimant“) appeal against an order allowing inspection by several other defendants of an unredacted settlement agreement between the Claimant and Simon Cuddihy (“Third Defendant“).… Continue Reading

Client communications remain subject to legal advice privilege notwithstanding dissolution and Crown disclaimer

By Squire Patton Boggs on October 28, 2019 Posted in Dispute Resolution

The Court of Appeal’s recent decision in Addlesee & Ors v Dentons Europe LLP has confirmed that the documents of a dissolved company remain subject to legal advice privilege (“LAP“) even if there is no longer a benefitting client entitled to assert LAP.… Continue Reading

English Court of Appeal judgment recognises the importance of industry standard ISDA Master Agreement terms when challenged by a competing jurisdiction clause in a financing agreement

By Chris Webber and Squire Patton Boggs on September 12, 2019 Posted in Dispute Resolution, Regulation

The Court of Appeal has confirmed that a jurisdiction clause that elects the English courts in an ISDA Master Agreement prevails when the underlying swap transaction forms part of a wider financing arrangement that is subject to the jurisdiction of the Turin courts: BNP Paribas SA v Trattamento Rifiuti Metropolitani SPA [2019] EWCA Civ 768.… Continue Reading

Forgoing an Unmeritorious Defence held to be Good Consideration by Court of Appeal

By Squire Patton Boggs on July 31, 2019 Posted in Dispute Resolution

The Court of Appeal in Simantob v Shavleyan [2019] EWCA Civ 1105 has held that an unmeritorious defence was good consideration for the variation of a settlement agreement, which resulted in payment to the creditor of a lesser sum than the debt due.… Continue Reading

New Disclosure Pilot Scheme – Now In Force

By Chris Webber and Katherine Wakeham on January 8, 2019 Posted in Dispute Resolution

Think of a fairly common situation; you receive an email from a third party with three colleagues in copy, you forward this email to your colleagues with comments, one responds and you then reply to the third party. Later, a dispute between your company and the third party arises. When you consider that this short … Continue Reading

Courts prepared to scrutinise and limit Norwich Pharmacal Orders

By Squire Patton Boggs on December 4, 2018 Posted in Dispute Resolution

A Norwich Pharmacal Order (“NPO“) forces a third party to disclose documents or information to an applicant. These Court orders are typically used to identify a proper defendant to a claim or to get information to enable someone to set out their case in Court documents. The respondent to an NPO application is generally not the defendant to … Continue Reading

No Contractual Duty Owed to Customers by Banks when Conducting FCA Review into IRHPs

By Mariyam Harunah on August 10, 2018 Posted in Contracts and Agreements, Dispute Resolution

The Court of Appeal in Elite Property Holdings Limited, Decolace Properties Limited v Barclays Bank Plc [2018] EWCA Civ 1688 considered the appellants’ Application for permission to appeal against the Mercantile Court Judge’s decision to strike out part of the Appellants claims against the Respondent Bank. Whilst the application concerned permission to appeal, this was the first occassion on which … Continue Reading

Court guidance on whether “first past the post” is really a legal principle

By Squire Patton Boggs on May 3, 2018 Posted in Dispute Resolution

The Commercial Court has recently handed down its judgment in the case of Midtown Acquisitions LP v Essar Global Fund Limited and Others [2018] EWHC 789. The decision provides useful guidance on whther “first past the post” is really a legal principle when it comes to charging orders.… Continue Reading

Court of Appeal decision brings reassuring clarity for judgment creditors

By Squire Patton Boggs on April 27, 2018 Posted in Dispute Resolution

The Court of Appeal recently heard an appeal from the Central London County Court, in which a judgment debtor (“L”) appealed a decision than an application to pay a judgment debt by instalments had been refused – Diana Loson v Brett Stack, Newlyn Plc [2018] EWCA Civ 803.… Continue Reading

Mastercard, the next instalment. The retailer strikes back

By Squire Patton Boggs on February 12, 2018 Posted in Banking, Dispute Resolution

The previous four episodes of the Mastercard saga (as detailed in our previous blog posts) focussed on a number of legal battles between Mastercard and both consumers and retailers. These disputes have centred on Mastercard’s alleged “uncompetitive” interchange fees and restrictive rules on cross-border acquiring. The latest claim by retailers follows a class action brought on … Continue Reading

Overcoming the principle of “reflective loss”

By Chris Webber and Michael Davar on November 1, 2017 Posted in Contracts and Agreements, Dispute Resolution

In an important recent decision the Commercial Court confirmed the availability of specific performance of a shareholder’s rights under shareholder agreements as a means to dodge the difficulties created for shareholders by the principle of ‘reflective loss’. Background Facts Oceanic Trans Shipping Est was one of three shareholders in two joint venture companies, who owned … Continue Reading

Update: CAT declines the grant of a collective proceedings order in Walter High Merricks CBE v MasterCard Incorporated and others [2017] CAT 16

By Squire Patton Boggs on September 13, 2017 Posted in Banking, Dispute Resolution

Background As mentioned in our blog posted on 20 September 2016, MasterCard was facing one of the UK’s first class-action lawsuits, following the introduction of collective proceedings under the Consumer Rights Act 2015. This allows for collective proceedings to be brought in the Competition Appeal Tribunal (“CAT”) on an opt-out basis, by representatives of consumers … Continue Reading