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
The UK Supreme Court in RTI Ltd v MUR Shipping BV has unanimously held that, as a general point of principle, parties to a contract cannot be prevented from relying on a force majeure clause if they refuse to accept...more
In the UK Supreme Court's judgment in RTI Ltd v MUR Shipping BV [2024] UKSC 18, which was handed down last week, it considered what obligations the words “reasonable endeavours” placed on a party, in the context of a force...more
The UK Supreme Court has unanimously decided that, in the absence of express wording, parties seeking to rely on a force majeure clause with a reasonable endeavours proviso are not required to accept offers of non-contractual...more
In a final twist to this long and winding litigation, the UK Supreme Court has allowed MUR Shipping’s appeal, holding that ‘reasonable endeavours’ provisions in force majeure clauses (express or implied) do not require...more
In Argentum Exploration Ltd v Republic of South Africa [2024] UKSC 16, the UK Supreme Court held that South Africa was entitled to state immunity in respect of an in rem (i.e., property based) claim by salvors of a World War...more
We have published a series of articles dealing with directors’ duties in the zone of insolvency. In previous briefings, we have written about the high-profile UK Supreme Court ruling in Sequana and the New Zealand Supreme...more
A dispute over a £5000 drop in property value has gone all the way to the Supreme Court which, today, confirmed that you cannot recover damages for encroachment of Japanese knotweed on your land if this occurred before the...more