The Supreme Court has clarified definitively the principles for ascertaining the law governing an arbitration agreement. In contrast to the Court of Appeal's earlier decision in the same case, the Supreme Court held that where the law governing an arbitration agreement is not expressly specified, a choice of main contract law (whether express or implied) will generally also apply to an arbitration agreement which forms part of that contract.
The High Court recently upheld an order that a petitioner should be restrained from proceeding with a winding-up petition on the basis that the petition debt in question was disputed by the alleged debtor and was subject to an arbitration agreement. The decision provides assurance that in the context of a winding-up petition, the court will consider the merits of a dispute relating to a petition debt which is subject to an arbitration agreement only in rare circumstances.
The High Court recently confirmed that the procedure for the registration and enforcement of an award made pursuant to the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) Convention does not require service of the claim form. The court upheld an order dispensing with service on a state of an order for the enforcement of an ICSID award. In addition, the court upheld an order for alternative service against the state.
The High Court recently dismissed a challenge to a previous decision to grant permission to enforce a Stockholm Chamber of Commerce award on the basis that contrary to the defendant's contention, there was a valid arbitration agreement between the parties and the defendant's arguments as to procedural irregularity had previously been raised in Swedish court proceedings, thereby giving rise to an issue estoppel.
In a recent decision, the Court of Appeal granted an anti-suit injunction restraining the defendants from pursuing Russian court proceedings in breach of a London arbitration clause. In reaching this decision, the court clarified the principles for ascertaining the law governing an arbitration agreement where the contract does not contain an express choice of such law and the main contract law differs from the law of the seat.
The government aims to implement a UK emissions trading system (UK ETS) in January 2021 following Brexit. This article outlines aviation-specific considerations of the proposed UK ETS and the interaction of the proposed scheme with the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation, the International Civil Aviation Organisation's market-based mechanism for offsetting emissions from aviation.
A recent High Court case demonstrates the utility and importance of including standard representations and warranties regarding power, authority and validity in aircraft leases, including as an estoppel against a defendant's claim that a lease is void and unenforceable as a result of alleged breaches of foreign public procurement legislation and lack of authority. The decision also illustrates the benefit of choosing English law to govern aircraft lease transactions, particularly between international parties.
A recent Court of Appeal decision regarding a claim of economic duress against an airline reinforced the fundamental importance of ensuring contractual clarity and certainty as a matter of English law. For companies operating in the aviation sector, where there may be an unequal power dynamic, parties will be unable to look to economic duress to undo a lop-sided bargain unless there is some unlawful action or provable bad faith on the part of the party with greater power.
In a recent High Court Case, Aircraft Purchase Fleet Limited (APFL) sought $260 million in damages from Compagnia Aerea Italia (CAI) for an alleged repudiatory breach of a framework agreement under which CAI had agreed to lease certain new Airbus A320 family aircraft. APFL had agreed to buy these aircraft from Airbus. However, CAI argued that it had become impossible for either party to perform the framework agreement following Airbus' termination of its obligations to sell aircraft to APFL.
In July 2017 the government released proposals to regulate the use of drones in the United Kingdom. Since then, the regulation of drones has been transferred to the European Union and now falls under the EU Basic Regulation. Many of the UK government's proposals for drone operators are included in the EU Basic Regulation, which sets the groundwork for establishing rules that will require operators of drones that weigh 250kg and above to register them and ensure that they are marked for identification.
Bank of England Governor Andrew Bailey recently delivered a speech entitled "Reinventing the Wheel (with more automation)", in which he outlined regulatory changes that payments market participants can expect, including as part of the global regulatory response to stablecoins. Bailey emphasised the importance of not stifling innovation and highlighted the benefits that stablecoins, in particular, could offer.
In 2019 the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) hosted conduct roundtables with 18 wholesale banks termed the 'engine room'. The roundtables culminated in the FCA's latest report on the 5 Conduct Questions Programme, 'Messages From the Engine Room', which reflects the FCA's findings and perspectives. This article summarises the key takeaways from the report and provides commentary and questions that firms might usefully address.
The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) recently publicised the disqualification of three individuals from acting as directors as a consequence of their company's involvement in an infringement of UK competition law. In view of the CMA's commitment to enforcement actions and to ensuring that directors are held personally responsible for competition law compliance, individuals and organisations should, among other things, proactively consider the extent of any potential exposure that they may face.
The acquisition of a minority shareholding (which satisfies the jurisdictional criteria under the UK merger control regime) without obtaining clearance presents a range of legal and commercial risks for parties, including that the Competition and Markets Authority could ultimately order the acquisition to be undone. This article highlights some ways for parties to identify and understand the extent of the risks of an acquisition.
The Competition and Markets Authority can open an investigation and impose initial enforcement orders where it has reasonable grounds to suspect that two or more enterprises have ceased to be distinct. This includes circumstances in which an acquirer purchases only a minority shareholding in the target because, under the UK merger control regime, two or more enterprises cease to be distinct where they are brought under common ownership or common control.
Where the Competition Market Authority (CMA) opens an investigation into a completed transaction, it will generally impose an initial enforcement order (IEO). In addition, the CMA can impose IEOs in the context of planned transactions, but anticipates that it will do so relatively rarely in practice. In the context of a completed transaction, an IEO aims to ensure that the acquired business continues to compete with the acquiring business and is maintained as a going concern during the course of the CMA's investigation.
Under the UK merger control regime, while parties can notify transactions and obtain clearance from the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) before completion, there is no legal requirement to do so. However, if parties do not obtain clearance before completion, the CMA can still investigate. Therefore, a completed transaction is potentially at risk of investigation during the four-month statutory period.
The Coronavirus outbreak may result in an upsurge of force majeure-related claims under commercial contracts. A further risk now coming to light is customers seeking to enforce contractual fines, penalties, service credits or liquidated damages in connection with supplier failure or delays arising from coronavirus-related issues. As such, a reminder of the law in this area now also feels appropriate.
In 2018 the Court of Appeal rejected a stockbrocker's appeal against the High Court's decision that it owed a client a Quincecare duty. In a recent ruling, the Supreme Court upheld the Court of Appeal's decision. The client's Quincecare claim was held not to have been defeated by illegality as, in the circumstances, the fraud of a sole shareholder of a company should not be attributed to the company itself.
In November 2019, in the looming shadow of the collapse of Thomas Cook Group plc, the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) Committee published a letter of recommendations to Secretary of State for the Department of BEIS Andrea Leadsom. The letter follows BEIS's inquiry into the collapse of Thomas Cook and the factors that led to the global travel group's downfall and covers a range of recommendations relating to corporate governance, audit reform and executive pay and bonuses.
In two recent cases, the English courts considered whether the duty of good faith should be implied into commercial contracts. These cases demonstrate that the issue of good faith is evolving in English law. Parties to relational contracts must therefore monitor developments to ensure that foreseeable risks are mitigated effectively in their contracts and commercial practices.
A series of recent cases have examined the circumstances in which a dividend can be challenged on the basis that it has been unlawfully paid. In one such case, the High Court considered a number of key principles regarding dividend payments and the circumstances in which directors can be pursued for dividends paid prior to an insolvency. This judgment provides some comfort to directors who rely on professional advisers to determine whether to declare a dividend payment.