We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 14

COGSA trumps Carmack recent Supreme Court decision highlights tension between the US and Rotterdam rules

  • Squire Patton Boggs
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 28 2010

On June 21, 2010 the United States Supreme Court ruled that the Carmack Amendment does not apply to a cargo shipment originating overseas under a through bill of lading where the bill of lading complies with the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act (COGSA) and includes a Himalaya Clause extending certain defenses and limitation of liability to subcontractors

Dalmare Spa V Union Maritime Ltd 2013 1 LLR 509

  • Squire Patton Boggs
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • May 22 2013

Recently the High Court in England and Wales took the opportunity to rule that the condition of a second hand vessel, sold pursuant to the terms of

CAT upholds Stagecoach challenge to CC prohibition of Preston Bus acquisition

  • Squire Patton Boggs
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • May 31 2010

Stagegroup lodged an application to the CAT under section 120 EA02 for a judicial review of the CC decision that Stagecoach's acquisition of Preston Bus Limited may be expected to result in a substantial lessening of competition ("SLC") in the market for the supply of commercial bus services in the Preston area

Enron Coal Services Limited (in liquidation) v English, Welsh and Scottish Railway Limited

  • Squire Patton Boggs
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • March 16 2009

A claim brought by Enron Coal Services Limited (ECSL) has been allowed to continue despite English, Welsh and Scottish Railway Limited (EWS) petitioning the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) to strike out their claim on the grounds of rule 40 of the Tribunal Rules

Cutting a submarine cable can cost you, your vessel and your insurance protection

  • Squire Patton Boggs
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • January 27 2012

The decision of the Canadian court in Société Telus Communications v. Peracomo Inc. breaks new ground in cases involving faults to submarine cables and in the general international maritime law

Court of Appeal reaffirms rule that without prejudice material may not be used as an aid to interpretation

  • Squire Patton Boggs
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • March 30 2010

In the case of Oceanbulk Shipping & Trading SA v TMT Asia Limited, the Court of Appeal has overturned the High Court's ruling and reaffirmed the rule that without prejudice material may not be put before a court to assist in the interpretation of a settlement agreement

Andalusia High Court of Justice sentence, 20 October 2009

  • Squire Patton Boggs
  • -
  • Spain
  • -
  • January 29 2010

This sentence settles the appeal made by the entity NUEVOS ESPACIOS COMERCIALES, S.A., against the Order dated 20 September 2007 of the Tourism, Commerce and Sports Board

Competition Appeal Tribunal dismisses ECSL’s claim for damages

  • Squire Patton Boggs
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • December 31 2009

English Welsh & Scottish Railways Limited ("EWS") was found to have abused its dominant position in the market for haulage of coal by rail in Great Britain

Improper fines from red light cameras do not violate the Takings Clause - but they may violate the Ohio Constitution

  • Squire Patton Boggs
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 17 2010

The Sixth Circuit has given red light cameras a rare victory in Ohio

Without prejudice exchanges admissible for interpretation of a settlement agreement

  • Squire Patton Boggs
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • August 27 2009

In the case of Oceanbulk Shipping & Trading SA v TMT Asia Limited & 3 Others, the High Court has ruled in favour of allowing without prejudice exchanges to be adduced as evidence where there is a dispute over the interpretation of a settlement agreement