See our recent insights

View all insights
Mirror Mirror: Is the law now clear on reflective loss?
Helen Evans QC, Usman Roohani and Peter Hayden
| 28/06/2022

The principle of reflective loss has reared its head in multiple cases since 2020. Although the Supreme Court’s judgment in Sevilleja v Marex Financial Ltd [2020] UKSC 31 clearly aimed to narrow the scope of the principle, multiple cases since that date have grappled with precisely where the new boundaries lie. In this article, Helen Evans QC and Usman Roohani of 4 New Square Chambers in London, along with Peter Hayden of Mourant Ozannes in the Cayman Islands explain where the law now stands, how we got here, and whether any issues remain up for grabs.

Teeing Up For A Competition Lawsuit? The PGA Tour’s Refusal To Release LIV Golf Invitational Hopefuls
Carola Binney
| 10/06/2022

Carola Binney writes about the PGA Tour’s potential legal battle with the organisers of the inaugural LIV Golf Invitational Series, set to take place at London’s Centurion Golf Club from 9 to 11 June 2022. 

Fortification For Damages in Freezing Injunctions
Sian Mirchandani QC
| 24/05/2022

PDMRs in Securities Fraud Litigation: Various Investors v G4S
WIlliam Harman
| 11/05/2022

On 10 May 2022, Mr Justice Miles handed down the first substantive decision on the meaning of a “person discharging managerial responsibilities” (“PDMR”) under section 90A and Schedule 10A of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (“FSMA”). In this case note, Will Harman summarises the Court’s judgment and identifies further potential battlegrounds in this developing area of law. Shail Patel of 4 New Square Chambers acted for the successful respondents.

What can be challenged in contribution claims? Percy v Merriman White explained
Helen Evans QC
| 22/04/2022

On 12 April 2022, the Court of Appeal handed down judgment in the contribution claim between solicitors and counsel in Percy v Merriman White [2022] EWCA Civ 493. The case has clarified what has to be proved by a contribution claimant against a contribution defendant, and has explained the extent to which arguments of abusive collateral attack can be relied on in this context.

Helen Evans QC summarises the case and its ramifications.