The following Dispute Resolution news provides comprehensive and up to date legal information on Court compels disclosure in £500,000 phone crypto-theft case
The following Dispute Resolution news provides comprehensive and up to date legal information on Understating the incurred costs in a cost budget did not amount to misconduct (Vardy v Rooney)
The following Dispute Resolution news provides comprehensive and up to date legal information on Tycoon’s son loses challenge to £3m Howard Kennedy Bill
Duty of care and breach in clinical negligence claimsThe duty of careA medical practitioner owes a duty of care to their patient. This duty is to take...
False imprisonmentLiabilityFalse imprisonment consists of the complete deprivation of liberty without a lawful basis. Claims will in practice be made...
Pain, suffering and loss of amenityValuing the lossHow should an injury be measured in a sum of money? After all no formula can calculate the value of...
Psychiatric injury—secondary victimsWhat is a secondary victim?A primary victim is a claimant who was directly involved as a participant in the...
Micklefield clausesWhat is a Micklefield clause?It is common for employee share plans to provide that, on termination of employment (or when an employee is given or receives notice of termination of employment), subsisting share awards will be forfeited and subsisting share options will lapse.It is
Financial clean break orders in family proceedingsDuty of the court to consider a clean breakAlthough there is no presumption in favour of there being a financial clean break between parties on divorce, the court is under a duty to consider whether it would be appropriate to exercise its powers so
Brussels I (recast)—domicile (Arts 4 and 63) [Archived]ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained.This Practice Note considers the general rule set out in Article 4 of Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast) when determining the relevance of a defendant’s domicile to
Dispute Resolution analysis: The High Court has provided concise guidance as to how misrepresentation should be analysed when considering jurisdictional gateways. Under Article 5(3) of the Lugano Convention, in negligent misstatement cases, the place of the event giving rise to damage is normally
0330 161 1234