United Kingdom: Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration

As generative AI tools become ubiquitous in the workplace, employers face a critical but often overlooked challenge: preserving AI-generated documents during litigation. This article examines how the duty to preserve evidence extends to GenAI prompts, outputs, and chat histories, and why failing to capture this data could expose organizations to serious legal consequences.

English courts have reaffirmed that witness coaching is prohibited regardless of method, including through AI chatbots. A recent criminal case examined whether AI-generated documents that rehearsed cross-examination answers constituted impermissible coaching, ultimately finding that while such use violates established principles, procedural safeguards may prevent proceedings from being stayed. The decision raises critical questions about how AI tools intersect with longstanding rules protecting witness test

The Disclosure Review Working Group (DRWG), which is considering the potential simplification of disclosure rules for the Business and Property Courts, has today published a brief update on progress...

The commercial value of sport has surged in recent years, bringing with it a sharp rise in legal disputes across the sector. From high-stakes broadcasting deals and sponsorship arrangements to complex investment structures and evolving regulatory frameworks, the landscape has become increasingly contentious. Since 2020, sports-related litigation in English courts has increased more than sixfold, with football leading the charge alongside motorsport, horse racing, and other major sports.

One of the most striking findings from the recent Global Family Business Think Tank was the near unanimity among experts that inheritance disputes pose a serious threat to family enterprises. Ninety five per cent of contributors agreed that disputes over inheritance represent a major risk to continuity.

A joint venture sought an injunction to prevent a beneficiary from calling on a US$484 million performance guarantee, arguing the liquidated damages clause was an unenforceable penalty and the demand was non-compliant. The court examined whether injunctive relief could be granted to suspend a bond call pending arbitration, and what standard of proof applies when challenging such demands on contractual grounds.

The commercial value of sport has surged in recent years, bringing with it a sharp rise in legal disputes across the sector. From high-stakes broadcasting deals and sponsorship arrangements to complex investment structures and evolving regulatory frameworks, the landscape has become increasingly contentious. Since 2020, sports-related litigation in English courts has increased more than sixfold, with football leading the charge alongside motorsport, horse racing, and other major sports.

The Family Justice Council's May 2025 guidance addresses the increasingly common practice of making covert recordings in family proceedings involving children. While smartphones have made secret recording easier than ever, the legal and welfare implications of using such evidence in court are complex and potentially serious. Understanding when recordings may be admissible, and when they might actually harm your case, is crucial for anyone involved in family proceedings.

A joint venture sought an injunction to prevent a beneficiary from calling on a US$484 million performance guarantee, arguing the liquidated damages clause was an unenforceable penalty and the demand was non-compliant. The court examined whether injunctive relief could be granted to suspend a bond call pending arbitration, and what standard of proof applies when challenging such demands on contractual grounds.

The UK Supreme Court's narrow 3-2 decision in The Kingdom of Bahrain v Shehabi denies state immunity to foreign governments accused of remotely hacking individuals within UK territory, establishing that cyber surveillance operations causing harm to UK residents fall outside traditional immunity protections. This landmark ruling clarifies the territorial tort exception under the State Immunity Act 1978 and may expose foreign states to liability for state-sponsored cyberattacks targeting UK-based individuals

The UK Supreme Court has ruled on whether sovereign states can invoke immunity to resist enforcement of adverse ICSID arbitration awards in English courts. Spain and Zimbabwe challenged the registration...

The English Court of Appeal has ruled that a state's ratification of the New York Convention does not constitute a waiver of sovereign immunity in enforcement proceedings. Does this decision create obstacles for investors seeking to enforce arbitral awards against states, and what strategies should parties employ when contracting with state entities?