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: 1-4 of 4

Advocate General opinion: no legal professional privilege for in-house lawyers in EU competition investigations

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • European Union
  • -
  • June 7 2010

In the EU competition law context, the Advocate General's opinion in Akzo Nobel Chemicals Ltd v Commission of the European Communities (Akzo) was published on 29 April 2010

Supreme Court rules that contract exists despite "subject to contract" provision

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • March 31 2010

A case involving the impact of a counterparts clause in a draft agreement has gone all the way to the Supreme Court, which ruled that a contract existed

Court of Appeal rules on duty to mitigate loss

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • March 31 2010

In Lombard North Central Plc v Automobile World (UK) Ltd 2010 EWCA Civ 20, the Court of Appeal addressed the important issue of a party's duty to mitigate its loss

Parties cannot avoid Commercial Agents Regulations by choice of non-EU law and arbitration

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • European Union, United Kingdom
  • -
  • January 29 2010

In Accentuate v Asigra 2009 EWHC 2655 (QB) the English High Court held it had jurisdiction to hear a claim for compensation under the Commercial Agents (Council Directive) Regulations 1993, even though the relevant agreement was subject to a choice of Canadian law and arbitration and the Canadian arbitral tribunal had already ruled against the claim