Search results
29 results ordered by RelevanceRelevanceDate (Asc)Date (Desc)Seniority of PositionA-ZZ-A
Green claims update: June 2025
Welcome to our June 2025 round-up of the key legal and regulatory developments relating to green claims.
Read moreClimate impact litigation strengthened with ICJ opinion
On 23 July 2025, the President of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) (considered the World's court) in The Hague, Netherlands, Judge Iwasawa Yuji, delivered the ICJ's advisory opinion on the obligations of States in respect of climate change. Hailed as an "historic achievement which sets the benchmark for climate action going forward", this keenly awaited opinion was, surprisingly, derived from students in the Pacific Island State of Vanuatu seeking to fight the climate crisis. In an attempt to force richer nations, who have contributed the most to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, not only to listen to the vulnerable smaller countries taking the brunt of it on the front line, but to be held accountable, they sought sponsors from other UN Member States.
Read moreGreen claims update: April 2025
Welcome to our April 2025 round-up of the key legal and regulatory developments relating to green claims.
Read moreLeveraging ABC frameworks for ESG compliance
With ESG regulations evolving rapidly, businesses are facing increasing obligations, ranging from supply chain due diligence (CSDDD, EU Deforestation Regulation) to corporate reporting (CSRD, ISSB).
Read moreGreen claims update: February 2025
Welcome to our round-up of the key legal and regulatory developments relating to green claims.
Read moreReverse-engineering and disassembly of IBM mainframe software in breach of software licence (IBM v LzLabs) – Part 2
This second article on IBM v LzLabs explores the validity of IBM's audit request and subsequent termination of the ICA.
Read moreReverse-engineering and disassembly of IBM mainframe software in breach of software licence (IBM v LzLabs) – Part 1
In IBM United Kingdom Ltd v LzLabs GmbH and others [2025] EWHC 532 (TCC), the High Court has provided useful guidance on what constitutes unlawful reverse engineering and the extent of the Software Directive's statutory exceptions to software copyright protection set out in the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (the CDPA).
Read moreSix steps to AI Literacy (whether legally required to or not)
At the beginning of February 2025, the AI literacy requirement under the EU AI Act came into force. The effect of this is that certain businesses must take measures to ensure a sufficient level of AI literacy in their staff.
Read moreFirst (Brands) of many? US firm collapses rock private credit markets
Since we last wrote about private credit in early September, the market has been rocked by the collapse of US car parts company First Brands. The First Brands debacle, the similar demise of the subprime lender Tricolor and concerns in the US regional banking sector all appear set to cause billions of dollars in losses across capital markets. First Brands and Tricolor both collapsed with unnerving speed amid allegations of fraud, culminating in First Brands suing its own founder for allegedly misappropriating billions of dollars of company money. Litigators like us are watching the fraud allegations and related inter-creditor disputes closely, but the broader industry will be more concerned by what they say about private credit markets as a whole.
Read moreImproving transparency: new rules on public access to documents in proceedings
From 1 January 2026, new rules will come into force in the Commercial Court, London Circuit Commercial Court and Financial List with the aim of improving public access to documents in civil proceedings. The new rules will require legal representatives to add various categories of documents referred to at public hearings to the Court's electronic file, meaning they will be, by default, available to the public. The new rules are governed by Practice Direction 51ZH and are part of a 2-year pilot scheme aimed at improving transparency and open justice in the civil courts.
Read moreJudicial guidance on time limits for challenges to post-arbitral awards
The question of whether challenges brought under section 72(1) of the Arbitration Act 1996 (the AA) can be made post-award has been a source of judicial and academic debate.
Read moreDust Settles in Favour of Industrial Defendant: Andrews v Kronospan Limited
In the recent case of Andrews v Kronospan Limited [2025] EWHC 2429 (TCC), the High Court rejected a group nuisance claim brought by residents living near a major wood-processing facility in North Wales.
Read moreRPC shortlisted for Commercial Disputes Team of the Year at Chambers UK Awards 2025
International law firm RPC has proudly been shortlisted for the prestigious Commercial Disputes Team of the Year Award at the Chambers UK Awards 2025.
Read moreFirst of a kind: High Court grants injunction restraining enforcement of an English Court judgment
Recent High Court judgment clarifies the scope of the English court's powers to grant anti-enforcement injunctions and the applicable legal test for granting anti-suit injunctions
Read moreAllegations of arbitrator bias fall flat in the recent case of V and N v K
In the recent case of V and N v K[1] the High Court confirmed the high threshold required for establishing arbitrator bias and considered the extent of an arbitrator's duty to disclose previous appointments in arbitrations under the London Maritime Arbitrators Association (LMAA) Rules. The judgment provides a useful review of the principles and serves as a reminder for parties to ensure that any challenges to arbitrator independence are properly particularised, considering the relevant practice for arbitrator appointment in the relevant field.
Read morePrivate credit, increasingly public problems
50% growth in the past four years has seen private credit become a $2-3 trillion-a-year asset class impacting every sector of the global economy, but behind this remarkable expansion lies the potential for serious risk.
Read moreThe Competition Appeal Tribunal provides further guidance on "standard requirements" in CPO Applications
The landscape surrounding the certification by the Competition Appeal Tribunal (the Tribunal) of applications for Collective Proceeding Orders (CPOs) (the necessary first step before a collective action can proceed to trial in the Tribunal) continues to develop as more claims proceed through the certification process and judgments are published. Now the legal principles underlying the certification of a collective action are better established, the Tribunal appears to be turning its mind to more forensic procedural management of this process, and establishing a series of standard requirements it expects proposed class representatives (PCRs) to meet in CPO applications.
Read moreDown and (finally) out: The Privy Council confirms the end of the Shareholder Rule exception to privilege
The Privy Council has resolutely confirmed the end of the "Shareholder Rule" exception to legal professional privilege – a decision that may have a significant impact on shareholder claims in the English courts going forward.
Read moreRPC traces the trends for LIDW25
With London International Disputes Week 2025 now wrapped up, we are reflecting on what it might tell us about the evolution of the disputes landscape.
Read moreCAT Collective Proceedings - Summer 2025 update
Developments in the UK’s competition collective proceedings regime continue apace with new claims recently issued in the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT).
Read moreCAT approves settlement in Merricks v Mastercard
The Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) has handed down its written judgment on the application for approval of a £200 million settlement with respect to the collective action proceedings brought by Walter Merricks (the CR) against Mastercard, on the interchange fees charged by Mastercard. The aggregate damages were initially estimated in the claim form at around £14 billion. The settlement application was opposed by the CR's funder, Innsworth Capital (the Funder).
Read moreCourt of Appeal decision allows litigation funders to be paid first in collective proceedings
Two years on from the seminal 'PACCAR' judgment, the Court of Appeal has upheld the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) decision in Gutmann v Apple [2024] CAT 18, that it has the power to order payment of a return to a litigation funder before any distribution of damages to members of the represented class. The CAT will need to exercise final control in each case over whether a litigation funder's return should be paid before distribution to the class, and the amount of that return.
Read moreAnother blow for Italian regional authorities in Italian Swaps saga judgment
Shortly before Christmas, the Commercial Court handed down judgment in another one of the long line of 'Italian Swaps Cases', Dexia SA v Regione Emilia Romagna.
Read moreThe PCR's "heavy responsibility": CAT judgment in Riefa v Apple and Amazon emphasizes the high standards expected of a PCR
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.
Read moreRPC features multiple times in the Solomonic 2023 High Court Disputes Year in Review
International law firm RPC has earned significant recognition for its leading disputes practice, in the highly-regarded Solomonic 2023 Year in Review of High Court Disputes.
Read moreWhistle-blowing on illegal cartels drops 70% in 5 years
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
Read moreAdjusting your recruitment process for a candidate with a disability: What is reasonable?
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has held that a failure to make enquiries into a job applicant's disability amounted to a failure to make reasonable adjustments.
Read moreStay connected and subscribe to our latest insights and views
Subscribe Here