Search results

Whistle-blowing on illegal cartels drops 70% in 5 years

Published on 18 Sep 2023. By Chris Ross, Partner and Arash Rajai, Partner

Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) recently increased award to £250,000 Calls to the CMA hotline have plummeted from 1,442 in 2017 to 427 in 2022

Hong Kong court grants reported Norwich Pharmacal in aid of execution

Published on 27 Oct 2022. By Charles Allen, Partner & Head of Hong Kong office

Unsurprisingly, claimants want to be able to enforce their judgments, especially when the underlying proceedings have been hard-fought and (therefore) expensive.

Hong Kong – General adjournment of court proceedings ends with more guidance for remote hearings

Published on 04 May 2022. By Carmel Green, Partner and Jennifer Leung, Associate

Hong Kong's general adjournment of court proceedings ends with more guidance for remote hearings.

Hong Kong courts further expand remote hearings for civil cases

Published on 20 Jan 2021. By Jonathan Crompton, Partner and Rebecca Wong, Partner

Hong Kong Courts – Expansion of use of remote hearings

Published on 17 Jun 2020. By Carmel Green, Partner

As expected, the judiciary in Hong Kong has announced that it will expand the use of remote hearings for civil cases. The first Guidance Note for Remote Hearings for Civil Business in the High Court (Phase 1) came into effect on 3 April 2020. This was during the general adjourned period (GAP), when the courts were generally closed as a result of COVID-19, save for urgent and essential court business. The GAP came to an end on 3 May 2020.

COVID-19 – Hong Kong Courts handling urgent and essential matters

Published on 09 Apr 2020. By Charles Allen, Partner & Head of Hong Kong office

On 8 April 2020, the Hong Kong Judiciary announced that the general adjourned period ("GAP") for court proceedings will continue until at least 3 May 2020. During the GAP, court registries and offices are, for the most part, closed. However, the GAP does not apply to "urgent and essential court hearings and/or matters".

The PCR's "heavy responsibility": CAT Judgment in Riefa v Apple and Amazon emphasizes the high standards expected of a PCR

Published on 27 Feb 2025. By Chris Ross, Partner and Jessica Davies, Associate

The Competition Appeal Tribunal (the Tribunal) recently handed down an important judgment, refusing to certify the proposed collective proceedings in Christine Riefa Class Representative v Apple Inc. & Amazon.com, Inc. After two certification hearings, the Tribunal was not satisfied that it would be just and reasonable for the Proposed Class Representative (the PCR) to bring the proceedings following concerns relating to Professor Riefa's understanding of the PCR's funding arrangements. The judgment reiterates the strict requirements and high standards expected of a PCR.