Category: Case Law

London skyline (Houses of Parliament/Big Ben) with a cracked insurance contract, a bundle of Pound Sterling cash, and a symbolic broken chain. Represents the UK Court of Appeal ruling confirming COVID-19 business interruption cover and rejecting insurer arguments on causation

Insurers Lose Appeal on COVID-19 Business Interruption Cover (At-the-Premises Disease Clauses)

The Court of Appeal in London International Exhibition Centre plc v Allianz & Ors [2024] EWCA Civ 1026 upheld the High Court’s ruling that policyholders can recover COVID-19 business interruption losses under “at the premises” disease wordings, holding that each case of COVID-19 at the insured premises formed part of the concurrent cause of national closure orders.

Manolete Case Study: Directors Liable for £1.4m Misappropriation and Unlawful Dividends

The High Court ordered the former directors of Evershine Travel Limited (In Liquidation) to repay more than £1.4 million after treating company funds as their own and authorising unlawful dividends while the company faced a £17.58 million deficit to creditors. The case highlights the severe consequences for directors who breach duties owed under the Companies Act 2006 once a company approaches insolvency.

Only with court permission under CPR 36.10. You must prove a "change of circumstances" (e.g., new evidence), not just a change of mind. See our litigation guide.

Chinda v Cardiff: Rules on Withdrawing Accepted Part 36 Offers

Master Cook’s ruling in Chinda v Cardiff & Vale University Health Board EWHC 2696 (KB) refuses permission to withdraw an accepted Part 36 offer, stressing that a mere change of mind fails CPR 36.10’s “change of circumstances” test – even for vulnerable claimants. The court prioritised CPR Part 36 certainty.

Stylised digital illustration showing a blockchain network connecting to the Royal Courts of Justice silhouette, symbolising the intersection of cryptocurrency technology and English fiduciary law.

Court of Appeal: Blockchain Developers Owe Fiduciary Duties to Crypto Owners (Cryptocurrency Litigation)

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.

CCjs debt recovery london litigation lawyer solicitor barrister CFA no win no fee dba limitation period

Creditor’s Guide to Enforcement of Unpaid & Old Court Judgment Debts in the UK (2025)

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.

Manolete Partners Plc v Trevor Howarth

Success: Defence of Manolete Director Repayment Claim

In Manolete Partners Plc v Trevor Howarth [2024] EWHC 2294 (Ch), the High Court dismissed a £101,000 claim against the former CEO of One Legal Services. Manolete alleged that repayments to Mr Howarth’s director loan account during the firm’s CVA were unlawful preferences under the Insolvency Act 1986. Judge Barber disagreed, holding the payments were made in good faith.

Manolete Partners Plc v Sampson Coward LLP High Court Refuses Summary Judgment in £2m Escrow Breach Claim

Manolete Case Study: Court Refuses Summary Judgment in £2m Escrow Breach Claim (Breach of Undertaking)

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.