The Court of Appeal has handed down judgment in Heathrow Airport Ltd & Ors v Her Majesty’s Treasury & Comrs for HM Revenue & Customs (Rev 1) [2021] EWCA Civ 783. The case, which was listed in The Lawyer’s Top 20 Cases for 2021, concerned a judicial review of the HMRC’s and the Treasury’s decision […]
News & publications
A Divisional Court, comprised of the President of the Family Division and Sir Duncan Ouseley, handed down its judgment on London Borough of Barnet v AG & Ors [2021] EWHC 1253 (Fam), concerning the question whether certain provisions of the Diplomatic Privileges Act 1964 are compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights. The London Borough […]
The BVI Commercial Court has set aside ex parte orders obtained by Tethyan Copper Company Pty Limited (“Tethyan”) recognising and partially enforcing a US$6bn ICSID Arbitration Award (Case No. ARB/12/1) against the Islamic Republic of Pakistan (“Award”). In December 2020, Tethyan obtained ex parte orders against the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and other respondents, including […]
On Friday 21 May the Court of Appeal handed down judgment in Lenkor Energy Trading DMCC v. Puri [2021] EWCA Civ 770. The Claimant (“Lenkor”) sought to a enforce a Dubai judgment against the Defendant (“Mr Puri”). The Dubai judgment held Mr Puri personally liable in the sum of about AED123m (about $34m) for drawing […]
On 29 April 2021 Mr Justice Calver granted an interim anti-suit injunction in favour of the claimant and also permission to serve out and for alternative service. The judgment has been published as ZHD v SQO [2021] EWHC 1262 (Comm). The order gives effect to the arbitration clause incorporated into a bill of lading and […]
Judgment in SFO & Anr v Litigation Capital Ltd & 46 Ors (In re Gerald Martin Smith) was handed down by Mr Justice Foxton on 18 May 2021 (the “Trial Judgment”) following a seven week fully remote trial which took place between January and March 2021. Foxton J also handed down a substantial judgment on […]
Blackstone Chambers, Brick Court Chambers, Essex Court Chambers, Fountain Court Chambers, One Essex Court Chambers and Three Verulam Buildings are delighted to invite all current mentees in the Mentoring for Underrepresented Groups scheme to attend a virtual pupillage workshop on Thursday 17 June from 6pm to 8pm. The workshop will be hosted by the six […]
On 19 May 2021, judgment was issued in Trappit S.A. & others v. American Express Europe LLC & another [2021] EWHC 1344 (Ch) by Mr Justice Snowden sitting remotely in the Intellectual Property List of the Chancery Division in the High Court in London. This judgment concerns a challenge to jurisdiction heard over two days […]
In Interdigital Technology Corporation & Ors. vs. Xiaomi Corporation & Ors, the Delhi High Court was the first court in India to deal with the issue of an anti-execution injunction. The novelty of the issue was highlighted by HMJ Harishankar at paragraph 82 of the judgment: “The tests which would govern consideration of an application […]
On 6 May 2021, the Court of Justice of the European Union (First Chamber) (“CJEU”) gave judgment in Case C-499/18 P Bayer CropScience AG and Others v European Commission. The case is the culmination of long-running litigation concerning neonicotinoid pesticides and their alleged effects on bees. The judgment is significant for what it says about […]
An article written by Nigel Eaton QC and Jeremy Brier, Essex Court Chambers The unprecedented legal restrictions on private and public life over the last year have inflicted untold damage on businesses, particularly in the entertainment, hospitality, and retail sectors. Unsurprisingly, those with business interruption cover have endeavoured to shift the economic pain of repeated lockdowns […]
Written by Bibek Mukherjee of Essex Court Chambers. Applicants seeking an interim injunction, such as worldwide freezing orders (“WFOs”), are conventionally required, as part of the ‘price’ of obtaining such orders, to furnish a cross-undertaking in damages to the Court. If the Court later finds that the order has caused loss to the respondent to […]
