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 5,615

Public International Law update - A round up of developments
  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • France, United Kingdom, USA
  • February 4 2016

The have been a number of interesting and significant developments in the field of Public International Law around the globe since our last update


Supreme Court issues landmark judgment on penalty clauses
  • Hogan Lovells
  • United Kingdom
  • February 4 2016

Businesses will now be more confident in providing for a pre-determined consequence for breach of contract, unless that consequence is wholly


Simplifying mitigation: when does a benefit obtained by the claimant after breach of contract reduce its recoverable loss?
  • Hogan Lovells
  • United Kingdom
  • February 4 2016

In Fulton Shipping Inc v Globalia Business Travel SAU (2015), the Court of Appeal clarified the law in relation to when a defendant is entitled to


Directors behaving badly - the proper purpose rule and the power to issue restriction notices
  • Hogan Lovells
  • United Kingdom
  • February 4 2016

In Eclairs Group Limited v JKX Oil & Gas plc (2015), the Supreme Court considered the application of the proper purpose rule in relation to the


One's mistake is just one mistake
  • Hogan Lovells
  • United Kingdom
  • February 4 2016

In Capita (Banstead) 2011 v RFIB Group Limited (2015), the Court of Appeal considered the law relating to continuing breach of contract and duty, and


"No amendment" clauses - Financing Documents
  • CMS Cameron McKenna
  • United Kingdom
  • February 4 2016

A Commercial Court decision published last month has considered the enforceability of so called “no amendment” clauses, requiring amendments to a


Court of Appeal finds express terms of agreement varied by collateral contract
  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • European Union, United Kingdom
  • February 3 2016

The Court of Appeal has found there was a collateral contract between a car dealership and a customer, under which the dealership committed to supply


Case update: NMC Conduct and Competence Panel’s analysis of the credibility of witnesses is strongly criticised
  • Kingsley Napley
  • United Kingdom
  • February 2 2016

The decision of Mrs Justice Andrews DBE in this appeal may make difficult reading for the Conduct and Competence Committee (CCC) which adjudicated


Cavendish Square Holding BV v Makdessi: Penalties revisited
  • Clyde & Co LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • February 2 2016

In the Autumn 2014 edition of the Bulletin we considered the question of whether large deposits in property transactions could be considered


Directors' Duties: Provision of information to shareholders when seeking approval of a transaction. The Lloyds Shareholder Litigation
  • DAC Beachcroft LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • February 1 2016

In the Lloyds shareholder litigation (Sharp & Others v Blank & Others 2015 EWHC 3220 (Ch)), the High Court recently struck out various claims