LEXLAW Solicitors & Barristers
In addressing the challenge of stalled litigation, the Civil Procedure Rules provide an extensive legal framework designed to facilitate swift and just resolution of cases. Central to this framework is the overriding objective of the CPR, which mandates that cases should be handled justly and at proportionate cost.
We successfully represented a client in a significant cryptocurrency loan dispute. On 2 July 2024, the High Court handed down a judgment varying the valuation date for assessing damages in lieu of specific performance. Initially, the County Court had set the valuation date at the breach in 2019, which did not account for the significant increase in Ethereum’s value.
English law Unfair Prejudice Petitions offer a remedy for minority shareholders facing oppression by the majority within a company. Where the prospect of winding-up proves undesirable, section 994(1) of the Companies Act 2006 provides an alternative avenue for seeking redress. At LEXLAW, our expert company law team specialises in navigating the complexities of shareholder disputes and unfair prejudice claims.
UK financial institutions have been selling interest rate swaps and fixed-rate loans without fully disclosing the risks and contingent liabilities involved, leading to substantial liabilities for customers. Lexlaw, a law firm specialising in hidden derivatives litigation, advises on legal action for SMEs and individuals affected by mis-selling. They guide clients through obtaining redress, often achieving out-of-court settlements with banks and insurers eager to avoid precedent-setting judgments. Lexlaw provides a step-by-step guide for those suspecting they’ve been mis-sold financial products, encouraging prompt legal advice to meet claim deadlines.
The High Court, in its decision on Litasco SA v Der Mond Oil and Gas Africa SA & Anor [2023] EWHC 2866 (Comm), clarified the application of force majeure and the “ownership and control” test under UK sanctions law. It emphasized that significant difficulty, nearly impossible to overcome, is necessary to invoke force majeure for debt obligations. The ruling further established stringent criteria for proving “control” in relation to sanctioned entities, highlighting the necessity for actual influence over business decisions, rather than theoretical possibilities, to satisfy this condition. This decision provides a clearer framework for businesses handling contracts under these terms.
The ruling in Glaser KC & Miller v Atay [2023] EWHC 2539 (KB) affects individuals who have instructed direct access barristers and had to pay fixed fees even if a trial did not go ahead. The judge’s verdict rendered this inherently unfair term effectively null and void with no quantum meruit fallback.
Unless Orders are judicial directives that can force a non-compliant party to comply with a previous court order. Specifically, in the context of outstanding costs orders, Unless Orders can help ensure financial obligations are paid out.
Deputy Costs Judge Joseph in the case of Coram v D R Dunthorn & Son Ltd [2023] EWHC 731 (SCCO) affirmed that the costs of instructing leading counsel for a three-day trial were not recoverable as they were deemed unreasonable and disproportionate for a case with a maximum value of £115,000 (settled for £75,000).
The case of Dr Markus Boettcher v (Xio (UK) LLP & Ors [2023] EWHC 801 (Comm) (05 April 2023) recently had an interim judgment decided by the Commercial Court.
In the case Wright v McCormack [2022] EWHC 3343 (KB), the High Court has taken it upon themselves to begin contempt proceedings against certain individuals who may have revealed the content of a judgment while it was still under embargo.