Search results
237 results ordered by RelevanceRelevanceDate (Asc)Date (Desc)Seniority of PositionA-ZZ-A
Lawyers Covered - June 2022
Welcome to the latest edition of our Lawyers Liability & Regulatory Update, in which we look back over the last month at key developments affecting lawyers and the professional risks they face.
Read moreLawyers Covered - May 2022
Welcome to the latest edition of our Lawyers Liability & Regulatory Update, in which we look back over the last month at key developments affecting lawyers and the professional risks they face.
Read morePLC QTRLY - Q1 2022
Post-Covid and post-Brexit changes are on the horizon for the UK's public companies. This is the first of our regular updates to help our listed company clients and other market participants keep up to date with key developments relevant to issuers on the Main Market and AIM market of the London Stock Exchange.
Read moreLawyers Covered - March 2022
Welcome to the latest edition of our Lawyers Liability & Regulatory Update, in which we look back over the last month at key developments affecting lawyers and the professional risks they face.
Read moreDuties of Care to Third Parties in Tax Avoidance Schemes – Disappointment for Investors in McClean as Zacaroli, J Rejects Claims
Mr Justice Zacaroli has now handed down his judgment in David McClean and others v Andrew Thornhill QC [2022] EWHC 457 (Ch) - a ~£40m claim by investors in a tax scheme against one of the leading tax barristers in the country. The judge dismissed the claim in its entirety holding, amongst other things that the barrister did not owe a duty of care to the investors.
Read moreDuties of Care to Third Parties in Tax Avoidance Schemes – Disappointment for Investors in McClean as Zacaroli, J Rejects Claims
Mr Justice Zacaroli has now handed down his judgment in David McClean and others v Andrew Thornhill QC [2022] EWHC 457 (Ch) - a ~£40m claim by investors in a tax scheme against one of the leading tax barristers in the country. The judge dismissed the claim in its entirety holding, amongst other things that the barrister did not owe a duty of care to the investors.
Read moreSIPPs and FOS - does the Rowanmoor decision change anything?
Last week FOS published a decision it reached last year in a complaint against a SIPP provider involving advised sales. The FOS upheld the complaint, finding that the SIPP provider should have rejected business from the regulated financial adviser, CIB Life and Pensions Limited (CIB), given, broadly, red flags available to the SIPP provider with respect to the operation of CIB's business model including that CIB was not advising on the ultimate investment within the SIPP and as a result such introductions involved a significant risk of consumer detriment. The decision has received quite a bit of press attention - but has it moved the dial for SIPP complaints before FOS or not?
Read moreLawyers Covered - January 2022
Welcome to the latest edition of our Lawyers Liability & Regulatory Update, in which we look back over the last month at key developments affecting lawyers and the professional risks they face.
Read moreThe Future of Insolvency Regulation
On 21 December 2021 the Government launched a consultation into the future of insolvency regulation. The changes proposed in the consultation document will have a wide ranging impact on the insolvency profession (and its insurers) with the proposals including: the direct regulation of insolvency firms, the introduction of a single regulatory body with powers to order compensation against insolvency practitioners and firms, a new additional requirements regime, changes to the bond regime and a public register of insolvency practitioners and firms. Many of the changes proposed require primary legislation and so it may be some time before the changes to take effect (if adopted). But there does appear to be some wind behind these proposals given they follow on from the Call for Evidence in 2019 and a more general focus on insolvency issues in the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic.
Read moreLawyers Covered - November 2021
Welcome to the latest edition of our Lawyers Liability & Regulatory Update, in which we look back over the last month at key developments affecting lawyers and the professional risks they face.
Read moreLawyers Covered - October 2021
Welcome to the latest edition of our Lawyers Liability & Regulatory Update, in which we look back over the last month at key developments affecting lawyers and the professional risks they face.
Read moreLawyers Covered - July 2021
Welcome to the latest edition of our Lawyers Liability & Regulatory Update, in which we look back over the last month at key developments affecting lawyers and the professional risks they face.
Read moreLawyers Covered - August 2021
Welcome to the latest edition of our Lawyers Liability & Regulatory Update, in which we look back over the last month at key developments affecting lawyers and the professional risks they face.
Read moreLawyers Covered - May 2021
Welcome to the latest edition of our Lawyers Liability & Regulatory Update, in which we look back over the last month at key developments affecting lawyers and the professional risks they face.
Read moreLawyers Covered - April 2021
Welcome to the latest edition of our Lawyers Liability & Regulatory Update, in which we look back over the last month at key developments affecting lawyers and the professional risks they face.
Read moreLawyers Covered - March 2021
Welcome to the latest edition of our Lawyers Liability & Regulatory Update, in which we look back over the last month at key developments affecting lawyers and the professional risks they face.
Read moreThe November 2023 AI safety summit and the UK's direction of travel
The government has confirmed that the UK AI safety summit will be held at Bletchley Park on 1 and 2 November 2023.
Read moreTelecoms supply agreement excludes "loss of profit" claim under "anticipated profits" liability exclusion (EE v Virgin Mobile)
In line with a number of recent cases, in EE Limited v Virgin Mobile Telecoms Limited [2023] EWHC 1989 (TCC) the courts have shown that parties generally cannot avoid clear wording contained in exclusion clauses in order to recover losses that have been expressly excluded (in this case, loss of profits).
Read moreRolls-Royce entitled to hit the brakes in dispute over termination of a software services agreement (Topalsson v Rolls-Royce)
In Topalsson GmbH v Rolls-Royce Motor Cars Limited [2023] EWHC 1765 (TCC), the High Court has provided useful guidance on how to determine whether a software implementation timeline agreed by the parties is binding, when implementation is considered complete and in what circumstances failing to complete implementation by the contractual deadlines entitles the customer to terminate the contract.
Read moreA narrow escape – software services provider entitled to rely on single aggregate liability cap (Drax v Wipro)
When it comes to bespoke software development projects, a lot can go wrong. There's risk for the customer such as project delays, software defects, functionality issues and a lack of meeting of minds in terms of project requirements.
Read moreEU Design regulation changes coming on 1 May 2025: What businesses need to know
1 May 2025 sees the first in a series of implementations of the long-awaited changes to EU design law.
Read moreAesthetic appeal and craftsmanship are not enough: WaterRower fails to secure copyright protection as a UK work of artistic craftsmanship
The term "artistic craftsmanship" has no statutory definition under UK copyright law – a position that has only been made more challenging by a conflict between EU and UK case law in this area. In this hotly anticipated judgment, the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (IPEC) sought to determine what it means to be a work of artistic craftsmanship in the context of s 4(1)(c) of the Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 (CDPA).
Read moreMcDonald's BIG MAC trade mark – General Court gives decision on evidence of genuine use
In a decision that, practically, provides for only a tiny loss of protection for the behemoth brand and trade mark, on 5 June 2024 the European General Court (General Court) partially revoked McDonald's BIG MAC trade mark (the EUTM) in the EU (Supermac's (Holdings) Ltd v EUIPO (Case T 58/23)).
Read moreGinfringement: Success for M&S in the Court of Appeal in registered design spat with Aldi
M&S and Aldi's gin bottle battle over design rights has reached a conclusion (for now) as the Court of Appeal has unanimously upheld the IPEC's decision that Aldi's bottle infringed M&S' design.
Read moreClear as gin: M&S and Aldi take liquor bottle battle to the Court of Appeal
Intellectual property enthusiasts' favourite supermarket adversaries were back at loggerheads this week as M&S and Aldi appear before the Court of Appeal. The pair sought to thrash out a first instance decision handed down in the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (IPEC) regarding alleged infringement of M&S' registered design rights in a gin bottle.
Read moreThaler v Comptroller [2023] UKSC 49: the UKSC rules that AI cannot be an 'inventor'
To the surprise of no one, the UK Supreme Court (UKSC) has finally ruled that an artificial intelligence (AI) cannot be an inventor for the purposes of UK patent law. This judgment accords with the decisions of the lower courts in the UK and the initial ruling of the UKIPO. It also reflects similar findings from most of courts around the world where the claimant, Dr Thaler, brought similar actions.
Read moreGenerative AI and intellectual property rights—the UK government's position
The IPO is to produce a code of practice by the summer that will provide guidance to support AI firms in accessing copyright protected works as an input to their models.
Read moreM&S v Aldi – lookalike claims lit up by design rights
As lookalike products rise in prominence, the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court's (IPEC) recent ruling that the sale and advertisement of Aldi's 'Infusionist' range of favoured gins infringed M&S's UK registered designs protecting the light-up bottles containing its 'Snow Globe' gin range (Marks and Spencer PLC v Aldi Stores Limited [2023] EWHC 178) highlights the utility of registered design rights in circumstances where other intellectual property rights (IPR) are often less able to provide protection.
Read moreLookalikes and passing off—bottle design get-up claim (Au Vodka)
Currently there's significant activity in the lookalikes space. The Au Vodka claim (Au Vodka v NE10 Vodka [2022] EWHC 2371), which focuses on bottle design 'get-up', arrived in the courts for an interim injunction hearing in September 2022. Au Vodka's application was dismissed. The judgment shows that passing off—get-up claims based on shape can be challenging to bring, particularly at the interim stage, and prompts the question of whether it's possible to bring Cofemel and copyright into the lookalikes arena.
Read moreSky Kick Back! High Court finding of bad faith overturned by Court of Appeal in long-running Sky v Skykick saga
On 26 July 2021, the Court of Appeal (CoA) handed down its much-anticipated decision in the latest instalment of the Sky v Skykick trade mark dispute.
Read moreWilliam Grant & Sons v Lidl: where to be-gin?
On 25 May 2021, the Scottish Court of Session (SCOS) granted an interim interdict (akin to an interim injunction), which prevents Lidl from selling its own brand 'Hampstead gin' in Scottish stores, pending the outcome of the matter at trial.
Read moreCopyright: Online platform operators’ liability for users illegally uploading copyright material
C-682/18 Frank Peterson v Google LLC and others and C 683/18 Elsevier Inc. v Cyando AG EU:C:2020:586 – A-G opinion
Read moreLandmark case sees trade mark specifications cut down on grounds of bad faith.
Today, the High Court handed down judgment in Sky v SkyKick. The judgment follows the CJEU's 29 January 2020 decision, which answered various questions that the High Court had referred to it, back in June 2018.
Read moreCOVID-19 prompts changes to working arrangements for the Court of Justice of the European Union
Prompted by the COVID-19 pandemic, the CJEU announced, on 19 March 2020, that it will be temporarily changing its working arrangements.
Read more15% increase in counterfeit goods seized in 2015
According to the "Report on EU Customs Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights: Results at the EU Border 2015", the number of goods that were detained at the EU's external borders for suspected infringement of an IP right grew by an estimated 15% in 2015 compared with 2014.
Read moreGrowth vs. client care: SRA’s warning on mergers and the risk to public trust
We consider the key takeaways from the SRA's warning notice to firms growing by merger, which urges firms to keep client interests central to their decision-making processes.
Read moreSRA consults the legal sector on proposed changes to their fining framework
The SRA is conducting a consultation from the 28 June to 20 September 2024 on their proposed changes to the SRA Fining Guidance. The regulator is seeking feedback in response to the new unlimited fining powers granted under the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act (ECCTA 2023).
Read moreSRA fining powers – putting the SDT out of business?
The SRA is on a mission to increase its powers to levy financial penalties. The last 12 months have seen a substantial increase in its fining powers, and a grant of unlimited fining powers in matters relating to financial crime and SLAPPs is imminent. The SRA has now dramatically upped the ante, seeking the power to levy unlimited fines in all cases of serious misconduct. With the Legal Services Board appearing supportive, the proposal has the potential profoundly to affect the enforcement of professional discipline within the profession.
Read moreEnhanced Regulatory Supervision of Asset Managers in Europe – Greenwashing Risks
A common methodology has been developed by ESMA to allow national European regulators to share knowledge and experiences to facilitate convergence in how they supervise sustainability related disclosures.
Read moreCosts recovered in the Small Claims Track from an unreasonable Litigant in Person
Most (if not all) litigators will be familiar with the challenge of being on the other side of a claim brought by a litigant in person ("LiP"). The courts expect practitioners to be sensitive to their opponent's lack of legal expertise and familiarity with court rules, but judges have also been clear that they expect all parties – including LiPs – to follow the rules regardless of their legal representation.
Read moreSRA issues Warning Notice on solicitors' involvement in SLAPPs
SLAPPs (aka 'Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation') is a term coined in the USA. They are becoming the object of increasing concern over here too.
Read moreHong Kong – Claim pleading duty of care against auditor struck out for "putting the cart before the horse"
In Chan Kam Cheung v Ronnie K W Choi & Anor [2022] HKCFI 3028, a judge upheld a master's (judicial officer's) decision to strike out the plaintiff shareholder's action against the former auditors of the company.
Read moreSolicitors Entitled to Insurance Cover for Liability for Fees: Royal Sun Alliance Insurance Limited & Others v Tughans (a firm)
In a recent judgment, Foxton J held that a claim for damages against a firm of solicitors for fees which it was contractually entitled to was covered under the firm's professional indemnity insurance. He held that it did not matter if the fees were obtained through the solicitor's fraudulent misrepresentation provided that the solicitor had done what was required under the contract to earn the fees. The decision will not be welcomed by insurers.
Read moreShorter time limit for Third Parties (Rights Against Insurers) Act 2010 claims
A recent judgment has reduced the limitation period for third parties to make direct claims against insurers under the Third Parties (Rights Against Insurers) Act 2010 when compared to claims under the predecessor 1930 Act. The decision will make it easier for insurers to defend such claims on limitation grounds.
Read moreRisky Business: what to do when former clients ask further questions
In Spire Property Development LLP & Anor v Withers LLP [2022] EWCA Civ 970, the Court of Appeal considered the scope of a solicitor's duty when a former client posed questions to a solicitor concerning a transaction after the retainer had ended. The judgment will be of interest to solicitors who are asked for advice in circumstances where no retainer exists.
Read moreThe Professional Negligence Law Review, Edition 5
The Professional Negligence Law Review provides an indispensable global overview of the law and practice of professional liability and regulation. It covers the fundamental principles of professional negligence law in each jurisdiction, including obligations, fora, dispute resolution mechanisms, remedies and time bars. The authors then review factors specific to the main professions and conclude with an outline of recent developments and issues to look out for in the year ahead.
Read moreDouble warning for legal professionals: do not cut corners with disclosure
Further to a recent decision made by the Bar Tribunals and Adjudication Service, the Bar Standards Board has suspended a "top criminal silk" from practice on grounds of professional misconduct in respect of his failure to disclose material evidence during criminal proceedings in 2007. The decision, and the judgment made by the Court of Appeal in those proceedings, reiterates the importance of the ongoing obligation on legal professionals to give disclosure and comply with their duties to the court.
Read morePost COVID-19 UK: What Will the Professional Negligence Claims Landscape Look Like?
The cost of living is at an all-time high, with interest rates increasing and inflation currently sitting at around 9%. The chances of a recession in the UK over the next two years have increased. It will come as no surprise that we expect the number of claims against law firms to rise as the economic downturn takes hold, as was the case in 2008 and recessions before it.
Read moreLawyers Covered - April 2022
Welcome to the latest edition of our Lawyers Liability & Regulatory Update, in which we look back over the last month at key developments affecting lawyers and the professional risks they face.
Read moreImportant Court of Appeal clarity on the operation of s1(4) of the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978
A recent Court of Appeal decision (in which RPC acted for the successful barrister Appellant) provides important clarification on the operation of section 1(4) of the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 (“the Act”). Although the matter concerned a contribution claim by a solicitor against a barrister brought pursuant to the Act, the decision is of wider relevance/application for litigation practitioners and the Insurance market.
Read moreStay connected and subscribe to our latest insights and views
Subscribe Here