Legal News

Dispute Resolution weekly highlights—21 June 2018

Dispute Resolution weekly highlights—21 June 2018
Published on: 21 June 2018
Published by: LexisPSL
  • Dispute Resolution weekly highlights—21 June 2018
  • In this issue:
  • Starting and progressing a claim
  • Which court?—where to start a privacy claim
  • Consent orders—court's discretion to interfere
  • Declaratory relief parameters and amending statements of case
  • Costs and funding
  • CFA refers to incorrect defendant
  • Claims and remedies
  • Contract interpretation—implying a duty of good faith
  • More...

Article summary

This week's edition of Dispute Resolution weekly highlights includes analysis of various key decisions including Al Nehayan v Kent (implying a duty of good faith in commercial contracts), Richmond v Selecta (employer duty of care regarding employee personal internet accounts), Mezvinsky v Associated Newspapers (where to start a privacy claim), Malone v Birmingham Community Trust (CFA valid despite incorrect defendant being named), Riordan v Moon Beever (court intervention in consent orders), Office Depot v UBS Asset Management (declaratory relief) and an analysis piece on the forthcoming ENRC appeal (privilege). It also includes details of new content, our latest Q&As and some other information of interest to dispute resolution practitioners. or take a trial to read the full analysis.

Popular documents