Commercial news vlog - September 2020: Schrems II; COVID-19: statutory payments, holiday, sick pay and self-isolation; Marriott class-action damages suit

Commercial news vlog - September 2020: Schrems II; COVID-19: statutory payments, holiday, sick pay and self-isolation; Marriott class-action damages suit




Corporate & Commercial

Invalid notice of a claim

In most business sale agreements, the sellers will indemnify the buyers for claims that arise from pre-sale activities, provided the buyers give the sellers notice of those claims.  The notification requirements usually require the sellers to be provided with reasonable details of the matter, the nature of the claim and the amount claimed. As the buyers in a recent case found, it is better to be cautious and provide full details.  In this case the buyers claim failed because their formal notice of the claim (issued shortly before the deadline) did not provide sufficient detail, particularly about why the company may be liable.  The buyers will, perhaps justifiably, be sore about this decision as they had provided information about the claim some time before the formal notice together with regular updates.

News analysis: Contracts–construction (Dodika Ltd and others v United Luck Group Holdings Ltd)

Reflective loss

The Supreme Court has overturned 40 years’ of case law and ruled that the reflective loss principle does not restrict claims by unsecured creditors. Reflective loss describes a situation where a company has a claim against a third party and a creditor also has a claim against the same third party, that’s reflective of the loss suffered by the company. In this case, a company director had defrauded the company leaving it with no money to pay the creditor.  The reflective loss principle had prohibited creditor’s claims in these circumstances and only allowed the company to pursue the claim. This rule has now been overturned.

Practice Note: Reflective loss

Practice Note: Reflective loss—key and illustrative decisions

Data security

US Privacy Shield struck down

The Safe Harbor regime that allowed EU companies to lawfully transfer personal data to subscribing US companies, was invalidated in late 2015.  It was replaced in 2016 with the EU-US Privacy Shield but that has now also been struck down by

Subscription Form

Already a subscriber? Login
RELX (UK) Limited, trading as LexisNexis, and our LexisNexis Legal & Professional group companies will contact you to confirm your email address. You can manage your communication preferences via our Preference Centre. You can learn more about how we handle your personal data and your rights by reviewing our  Privacy Policy.

Related Articles:
Latest Articles:

Access this article and thousands of others like it free by subscribing to our blog.

Read full article

Already a subscriber? Login

About the author:

Louisa leads marketing for the in-house legal community at LexisNexis. She joined the dedicated in-house team at LexisNexis four years ago and has a passion for driving and facilitating initiatives which are customer-focused at their heart. Her vision is to support in-house counsel succeed in their fast-evolving role based on deep insight, data analysis and best practice gathered across the in-house community.

Prior to her in-house focused role, Louisa led the marketing for the bar and mid-market private practice sectors as well as product marketing lead for LexisPSL - LexisNexis' cloud based, practical guidance and legal research software solution.

She brings 20 years' marketing experience both client and agency side, specialising in B2B marketing in the Legal, TMT (Telco, Media and Technology) and Financial Services industries. In both South Africa, Europe and the UK.

Louisa is also an active member on the LexisNexis Gender Equality Matters (GEM) steering committee and is involved with the Families at LexisNexis Group which brings together, supports and lobbies for change those with an interest in balancing the challenges of work and family.