LEXLAW Solicitors & BarristersWe found 330 results for your search.
A Letter of Credit is an irrevocable written commitment by a Bank to make payment to a seller, in connection with the export of specific goods, against the presentation of specified documents identified in the Letter of Credit and relating to those goods. If you have a dispute about a documentary credit our expert UK lawyers can assist.
LEXLAW’s Financial Services Litigation team provides expert legal support for high-value claims and complaints against Metro Bank Plc. The team has experience in prominent High Court cases against Metro Bank and all other major UK banks. Clients can access specialist London-based solicitors and barristers to protect their rights and manage complex bank litigation efficiently.
For privilege to apply, there must be a lawyer (i.e. a solicitor or barrister) in the communication for legal advice privilege to apply. Legal advice privilege does NOT extend to other professionals such as accountants. Therefore, in disputes with HMRC for example, (potentially incriminating) communications with an accountant can be disclosed and are not privileged.
CPR Part 36 is a powerful tactical mechanism within the Civil Procedure Rules that can dramatically shift litigation risk and costs. A compliant, well‑timed Part 36 offer can unlock indemnity costs, enhanced interest and Jackson uplifts for claimants, while giving defendants a crucial tool to cap exposure and force serious engagement with settlement.
In Tulip Trading Ltd v van der Laan & Ors [2023] EWCA Civ 83, the Court of Appeal held that software developers maintaining Bitcoin networks may arguably owe fiduciary duties to crypto owners, recognising a serious issue to be tried on whether developers’ control over blockchain code gives rise to duties of loyalty and care towards asset holders.
Contrary to common belief, unpaid High Court & County Court judgments (CCJs) do not always become unenforceable after six years. With proper legal procedures and court permission, creditors can successfully enforce judgment debts many years old.
An application for relief from sanctions under CPR 3.9 is available where a party has failed to comply with court deadlines or procedural rules. The court will apply the three-stage test from Denton v TH White Ltd, considering (1) the seriousness of the breach, (2) the reasons for the default, and (3) all the circumstances of the case. Relief must be sought promptly, as delay may undermine the application.
The High Court, per Chief ICC Judge Briggs, held that Manolete Partners could not advance misfeasance claims under section 212 Insolvency Act 1986 via an Insolvency Application, and instead had to pursue them under CPR Part 7, ordering payment of the full Part 7 issue fee despite procedural arguments about hybrid claims brought in insolvency proceedings.
The High Court refused Sampson Coward LLP’s application for summary judgment in Manolete Partners Plc v Sampson Coward LLP [2023] EWHC 37 (Ch), allowing a £2 million claim concerning alleged mismanagement of escrow accounts during UK Property and Land Specialists Ltd’s insolvency to proceed. The ruling highlights the complexity of fiduciary breaches in escrow arrangements and confirms assignees’ rights to pursue breach of undertaking claims under the Insolvency Act 1986.
The High Court refused a summary judgment application by Sampson Coward LLP, a Salisbury-based law firm, over its handling of £2 million in escrow funds, allegedly misapplied while acting for connected parties, following assignment of the claims to litigation funder Manolete Partners.