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.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 12

Pre-action costs
  • Mills & Reeve LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • January 30 2010

The bank sought to enforce a guarantee against the defendant in proceedings (the Guarantee Claim


Calderbank offers revisited
  • Mills & Reeve LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • March 31 2014

The recent Court of Appeal decision in Walker Construction (UK) Ltd v Quayside Homes Ltd suggests that it may not be necessary for a defendant to


Tomlin orders
  • Mills & Reeve LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • October 4 2012

The court refused to rectify a Tomlin order where both parties were under the common mistaken assumption that the claimant bank had a charge in its favour to secure the defendant company's indebtedness


Lender’s claim for breach of trust
  • Mills & Reeve LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • March 2 2012

The court upheld the lender’s claim for breach of trust and equitable compensation, but it did not order full reconstitution of the trust monies advanced


Lloyds TSB Bank Plc v Markandan & Uddin meaning of “completion”
  • Mills & Reeve LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • March 2 2012

Where the defendant firm of solicitors had caused, through no fraud of their own, mortgage monies paid to it to be paid out to fraudsters in breach of the terms of their instructions and authority, it had acted in breach of trust


Goldsmith Williams v Travelers Insurance Company Ltd - condoning dishonesty
  • Mills & Reeve LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • February 28 2010

The dishonesty exclusion in a professional indemnity policy applied where a director of the solicitors’ firm Joshua & Usman Legal Services Limited (JULS), Ms Usman, had condoned a state of affairs which allowed her fellow director, Mr Atikpakpa, to perpetrate two mortgage frauds in which the firm had acted for the lenders


Solicitors’ liability for breach of trust
  • Mills & Reeve LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • October 24 2011

Where the defendant firm of solicitors had paid away mortgage monies to the vendors’ purported solicitors who did not exist in breach of the Council of Mortgage Lenders’ (CML) Handbook, they were liable to the lender for breach of trust


Privilege
  • Mills & Reeve LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • September 27 2011

The court has jurisdiction to order a solicitor to disclose his client’s contact details for the purposes of enforcing a committal order but the court shouldn’t make an order which might inhibit the client’s fundamental right to obtain legal advice


Solicitors’ breach of trust
  • Mills & Reeve LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • October 25 2010

Where the defendant solicitors had caused, through no fraud of their own, mortgage monies paid to them to be paid out to fraudsters in breach of the terms of their instructions and authority, they had acted in breach of trust


Solicitors’ duty of care
  • Mills & Reeve LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • April 15 2011

A bank's loss due to the impecuniosity of the counterparties to swap transactions or their unwillingness to abide by the decision of the English court was not within the scope of the duty of solicitors who had advised erroneously on the capacity of the counterparties to enter into the transactions