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 293

UK Pensions Update - February 2018
  • Baker McKenzie
  • United Kingdom
  • February 28 2018

The Government has published its responses to a number of pensions consultations. Final form Regulations in relation to each of these consultations


International swaps and restitution - when can parties recover payments made under invalid or null and void swaps?
  • DAC Beachcroft
  • United Kingdom
  • December 8 2016

In the latest in a series of disputes arising out of interest rate swap transactions entered into with Italian municipalities, the High Court has


Patel v Mirza 2016 UKSC 42
  • Hardwicke
  • United Kingdom
  • October 28 2016

Mr Patel transferred Mr Mirza £620,000 to bet on shares in RBS using insider information which Mr Mirza hoped to obtain from RBS contacts. The


Provisions of Mental Health Act 1983 do not preclude claims for restitution against local authorities and CCG’s
  • Hill Dickinson LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • August 11 2016

Newey J has held that the provisions of the Mental Health Act 1983 (MHA) do not exclude the availability of a private law claim for unjust enrichment


When will involvement in illegality prevent a claim for restitution?
  • Shepherd and Wedderburn LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • August 4 2016

In the landmark case of Patel v Mirza, the UK Supreme Court has ruled on the issue of when involvement in illegality bars a claim. This article


Supreme Court reformulates test for when a claim will fail due to illegality
  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • July 25 2016

The Supreme Court has established a new approach to the question of whether a defendant will be able to rely on the defence of illegality: Patel


International arbitration newsletter- July 2016
  • Latham & Watkins LLP
  • USA, United Kingdom, European Union, Global, Iran
  • July 13 2016

Non-exclusive” arbitration clauses provide that disputes “may” be referred to arbitration (rather than “shall” or “should” be so referred). The Privy


High Commissioner for Pakistan v Prince Mukkaram Jah: Court confirms limitation period for restitutionary claims
  • Clyde & Co LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • June 28 2016

Where money is paid by mistake, a claim for restitution might be brought in equity. There has been difficulty in determining the limitation period


Restitution - High Commissioner for Pakistan v Prince Mukkaram Jah (High Court)
  • Clyde & Co LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • June 21 2016

Where money is paid by mistake, a claim for restitution might be brought in equity. There has been difficulty in determining the limitation period


VAT repayment and interest is subject to corporation tax
  • RPC
  • United Kingdom
  • November 26 2015

In Coin-a-drink Limited v HMRC, the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) considered the ability of HMRC to impose corporation tax on repayments of overpaid VAT