LEXLAW Solicitors & Barristers
The recent decision in Jones v Persons Unknown [2022] EWHC 2543 (Comm) has elated users of Crypto Exchanges operating in the UK as the Court held that the defendant Crypto Exchange should be taken as a constructive trustee in relation to the Wallet holders.
The Court of Appeal case of Re Compound Photonics Group Ltd; Faulkner v Vollin Holdings Ltd [2022] EWCA Civ 1371, in the context of an unfair prejudice petition filed according to Section.994 of the Companies Act of 2006, the Court of Appeal has clarified the meaning of the contractual responsibility of good faith.
Expert evidence is important and can help prove a claim or disprove allegations, especially where the case involves matters on which the court does not have the requisite technical or academic knowledge, or the case involves issues of foreign law. Unlike witnesses of fact, a qualified expert is permitted to give opinion evidence on any relevant matter.
High Court rejects retrospective (one day) extension of time for service of the sealed Claim Form. The Claimant has a potential professional negligence claim against its’ solicitors.
Extension of limitation period for claims against property developers for unsafe cladding will lead to further breach of building regulation claims.
A recent case of Beattie Passive Norse Ltd Anor v Canham Consulting Ltd highlights the importance of causation and repercussions of providing an inaccurate value of a claim.
The High Court has ruled that commercial leases were not “temporarily frustrated” by the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic and therefore the tenants were still obliged to pay rents to…
In Dwyer (UK) Franchising Ltd v. Fredbar Ltd & Bartlett [2021] EWHC 1218 (Ch), the High Court ruled that self-isolating due to coronavirus (COVID-19) counted as ‘force majeure’,…
The Court of Appeal recently analysed a swap mis-selling complaint submitted by the Claimant under the FCA Dispute Resolution scheme (“DISP”), which complaint would stop time running for the purposes of a making a complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service (“FOS”).
The High Court has refused permission for two property developers to amend their initial agreed cost budget of approximately £1.5 million after an attempt to request almost double the sums allowed.