Home / Dispute Resolution / Key DR developments / Weekly highlights

Legal News

Dispute Resolution weekly highlights—15 March 2018

Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis

Published on: 15 March 2018

Published by a LexisNexis Dispute Resolution expert

Table of contents

Claims and remedies
Supreme Court—misrepresentation
Protecting confidential information
Proprietary estoppel
Limitation
Supreme Court—company directors
Enforcement
Cross-border enforcement—extending time to appeal registration orders
Evidence and disclosure
Privilege

More sections of this document available when you sign-in to Lexis+ or register for a free trial.

Article summary

This week’s edition of Dispute Resolution highlights includes an analysis of various key decisions including the Supreme Court’s decisions in Steel v NRAM (misrepresentation) and Burnden Holdings v Fielding (limitation) and the Court of Appeal’s decisions in Christofi v National Bank of Greece (Cyprus) Ltd (cross-border enforcement) and Kerman v Akhmedova (privilege). It also includes details of new content, dates for your diaries and the latest Q&As.

Popular documents

Priority between loss reliefs in loss making companies

Priority between loss reliefs in loss making companiesWhy does it matter?A company that is a member of a group and has incurred any of the types of losses available for surrender by way of group relief may, without any further rules, have more than one way in which to use the loss. There are a

If a beneficiary signs a deed of disclaimer of their share of an estate and the estate pays their legal

If a beneficiary signs a deed of disclaimer of their share of an estate and the estate pays their legal fees, will that count as a PET against their estate?A disclaimer is the refusal of a gift prior to acceptance. The refusal of the gift must take place before the beneficiary accepts any benefit

Strike out—making an application to strike out a statement of case

Strike out—making an application to strike out a statement of caseA strike out order can be made either following an application by the parties or on the court's own initiative. This Practice Note deals with the scenario of the order being made following a party's application.Making an application

Can shares in a limited company that have not been paid-up at all be cancelled?

Can shares in a limited company that have not been paid-up at all be cancelled?A limited company having a share capital may not alter that share capital, except in the ways listed in section 617 of the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006). Shares in a company cannot simply be cancelled without following an