Litigation Law, Mediation Law and Arbitration Law

The Court of Appeal considered, in the first appeal of its kind, the tipping off offence under the Proceeds of Crime Act ("POCA"), confirming that a transaction-specific enquiry may trigger liability even in the context of an investigation which is in the public domain, and actual prejudice need not be proved.

The decision suggests such directors should not disclose the company's privileged material to their appointing investor unless that is in the company's interests and is expressly authorised.

The decision illustrates the court’s approach to the meaning of “public domain” in professionally drafted confidentiality agreements

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?

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.

Luxembourg and Belgium offer robust legal frameworks for arbitration proceedings, with comprehensive procedures for challenging and enforcing arbitral awards. Legal professionals can leverage detailed insights into post-award proceedings, recognition mechanisms, and remedies available through the courts in both jurisdictions.

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 Irish High Court has ruled that shareholders no longer have an automatic right to access a company's privileged legal advice, abolishing the shareholder rule that previously allowed such disclosure. This landmark decision aligns Irish law with recent developments in England, Wales, and Bermuda, fundamentally reshaping the relationship between corporate privilege and shareholder information rights.

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