-
The European Court of Justice's recent ruling that the U.K. had breached EU law by allowing an arbitral award to proceed underscores the diminished influence of EU jurisprudence in the U.K., hinting at the EU courts' increasingly nominal sway in international arbitration within jurisdictions that prize legal autonomy, says Josep Galvez at 4-5 Gray’s Inn.
-
An English court's recent decision in H1 v. W to remove an arbitrator because of impartiality concerns offers several lessons on mitigating bias, including striking a balance between arbitration experience and knowledge of a particular industry, and highlights the importance of careful arbitrator appointment, says Paul-Raphael Shehadeh at Duane Morris.
-
Highlighting the conflict between the territorial nature of trademark rights and the borderless nature of the internet, the U.K. Supreme Court's recent decision — that Amazon's U.S. website could infringe EU and U.K. rights by targeting local buyers — offers guidance on navigating trademark rights in relation to online sales, say Emmy Hunt, Mark Kramer and Jordan Mitchell at Potter Clarkson.
-
Although the common law has proved capable of applying established principles to crypto-assets, recent cases highlight persistent challenges in identifying defendants, locating assets and determining jurisdiction, suggesting that any meaningful development will likely come from legislative or regulatory change, say Emily Saunderson and Sam Mitchell at Quadrant Chambers.
-
Recent challenges to the admissibility of encrypted communication from the messaging tool EncroChat highlight the flawed presumption in the U.K. common law framework that computer evidence is always accurate, and why a nuanced assessment of such evidence is needed, say Sam De Silva and Josie Welland at CMS Legal.
-
The expansion of the gateway for service out of jurisdiction regarding third-party information orders has proven to be an effective tool against fraud since it was introduced in 2022, and recent case law offers practical tips on what applicants should be aware of when submitting such orders, says Rosie Wild at Cooke Young.
-
An English court's recent decision in H1 v. W, removing an arbitrator due to bias concerns, reaffirms practical considerations when assessing an arbitrator's impartiality, and highlights how ill-chosen language by an arbitrator can clear the high bar for disqualification, say Andrew Connelly and Ian Meredith at K&L Gates.
-
In Miller v. University of Bristol, an employment tribunal recently ruled that a professor's anti-Zionist beliefs were protected by the Equality Act 2010, highlighting for employers why it’s important to carefully consider disciplinary actions related to an employee's political expressions, says Hina Belitz at Excello Law.
-
.jpg)
The EU General Court's recent ruling in Delta Sport v. EU Intellectual Property Office — that Lego's registered community design for a building block was valid — helps clarify when technically dictated designs can enjoy IP protection, and demonstrates how companies can strategically use design rights to protect and enhance their market position, says Christoph Moeller at Mewburn Ellis.
-
The European Court of Justice's recent ruling in Bonnanwalt v. EU Intellectual Property Office, finding that a law firm had maintained independence despite being owned by its client, serves as a pivotal reference point to understanding the contours of legal representation before EU courts, say James Tumbridge and Benedict Sharrock-Harris at Venner Shipley.
-
The Law Commission recently published a consultation on recognizing a third personal property category to accommodate the development of digital assets, highlighting difficulties with current models of property rights and the potential consequences of considering digital assets as personal property, say Andrew Tsang and Tom Bacon at BCLP.
-
The Court of Appeal's recent ruling in Parker-Grennan v. Camelot, the first appellate decision to consider how online terms and conditions are publicized, provides, in its tone and verdict on incorporation, an invaluable guide for how to approach similar disputes in the digital space, says Eddy Eccles at Covington.
-
An English court's recent decision in Unipolsai v. Covea, determining that insurers' losses from COVID-19 lockdowns were covered by reinsurance, highlights key issues on insurance policy wordings, including how to define a "catastrophe" in the context of the pandemic, says Daniel Healy at Brown Rudnick.
-
U.K. employees will soon have the right to request flexible working arrangements from the first day of employment, including for religious observances, and refusing them without objective justification could expose employers to indirect discrimination claims and hurt companies’ diversity and inclusion efforts, says Jim Moore at Hamilton Nash.
-
.jpg)
While the High Court's recent COVID-19 payout decision in Gatwick v. Liberty Mutual, holding that pandemic-related regulations trigger prevention of access clauses, will likely lead to insurers accepting more business interruption claims, there are still evidentiary challenges and issues regarding policy limits and furlough, say Josianne El Antoury and Greg Lascelles at Covington.