In the recent case of Friends of the Earth v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing & Communities & others; South Lakeland Action on Climate Change v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing & Communities & others...more
Last month, the High Court ruled that planning permission previously granted for a coal mine in West Cumbria was unlawful (Friends of the Earth v West Cumbria Mining [2024] EWHC 2349 (Admin) ("West Cumbria Mining")). West...more
We are keeping an eye on the progress of the reform of the English Arbitration Act 1996. The Arbitration Bill, first introduced in November 2023, was designed to update the Arbitration Act 1996 and reinforce England’s...more
In its recent judgment in UniCredit Bank GmbH v RusChemAlliance LLC [2024] UKSC 30, arising out of a dispute between a Russian energy developer and a German bank concerning the effect of EU sanctions on Russia, the UK Supreme...more
The UK Supreme Court decision in UniCredit Bank v RusChemAlliance has confirmed that the English court has jurisdiction to grant an anti-suit injunction (ASI) to restrain foreign court proceedings brought in breach of a Paris...more
In UniCredit Bank GmbH v. RusChemAlliance LLC, the UK Supreme Court confirmed the general common law rule that a choice of governing law for a contract as a whole will apply to an arbitration agreement within the contract,...more
Case 1: The Manchester Ship Canal Company Ltd v United Utilities Water Ltd - The United Utilities sewerage network has around 100 ‘outfalls’ from which material emanating from sewers, sewage treatment works and pumping...more
In Tesco Stores Ltd v USDAW the UK Supreme Court has reinstated an injunction stopping Tesco from dismissing and re-engaging employees on new terms to remove their contractual pay protection. The circumstances in which the...more
On 9 July 2024, the Supreme Court unanimously held that collateral warranties deriving from or reflective of the primary building contract, and merely promising continued construction, are not generally considered agreements...more
The English High Court offers limited routes to bring “opt-out” group claims but, in recent years, funded claimants have attempted to bring representative actions under CPR 19.8 at a notable rate. The rule has been available,...more
With the rise of litigation funding of group actions, there has been an increasing use of representative actions by Claimants in recent years. In turn, Defendants are challenging this and the Courts are scrutinising cases in...more
An article considering the Supreme Court’s decision in Abbey Healthcare, which decided that a typically worded collateral warranty is not a construction contract for the purposes of the Housing Grants, Construction and...more
In a highly anticipated judgment, a 3:2 majority of the UK Supreme Court ruled in R (Finch) v Surrey County Council and others [2024] UKSC 20 that environmental impact assessments (EIAs) for fossil-fuel projects must include...more
"The law on 'knowing receipt' has perplexed judges and academics alike for several decades" – Lord Burrows (paragraph 99). In a decision with significant implications for claims involving fraud and breach of fiduciary duty...more
In this Insight, first published in PLC, James Clarke, Richard Shaw and Anna Blest consider the Supreme Court's decision in RTI Ltd v MUR Shipping BV [2024] UKSC 18, which confirmed that a party's obligation to exercise...more
The Situation: On June 20, 2024, the UK Supreme Court handed down a landmark decision in R (on the application of Finch on behalf of the Weald Action Group) (Appellant) v Surrey County Council and others (Respondents) [2024]...more
The UK Supreme Court’s landmark judgment in R (on the application of Finch on behalf of the Weald Action Group) v Surrey County Council and others (“Finch”) was handed down on 20 June 2024. Since then, more recent...more
Finch v. Surrey calls for assessment of all likely direct and indirect environmental effects in EIAs, including certain Scope 3 emissions if a reasonable estimate is feasible. On 20 June 2024, the UK Supreme Court (the...more
In a decision with far-reaching implications, the UK Supreme Court has determined that a grant of planning permission for oil production was unlawful for failing to take into account downstream greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions...more
Case 1: Patel and others v Spender and others - The applicants sought to modify a covenant against external alterations relying on the “limited benefit” ground in section 84 of the Law of Property Act 1925....more
On 20 June 2024 the UK Supreme Court issued its long awaited decision in R (on the application of Finch on behalf of the Weald Action Group) (Appellant) v Surrey County Council and others (Respondents) [2024] UKSC 20...more
In a landmark judgment handed down on 20 June 2024, R (Finch) v Surrey County Council and others [2024] UKSC 20, the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom has ruled that “Scope 3” greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions resulting from...more
Parties affected by a force majeure event should exercise "reasonable endeavours" to overcome such an event, even if the contract does not clearly state so. However, when exercising reasonable endeavours, parties do not...more
In its judgment in Sharp Corporation Ltd v. Viterra BV handed down last month, the UK Supreme Court held that damages for nonacceptance of goods should be determined by reference to the realisable value of the goods left in...more
Key Takeaways - In the words of the UK Supreme Court, the decision in RTI v MUR raised “fundamental points of principle” that could, in theory, apply to all force majeure clauses. Our top three takeaways are: Unlike the...more