Partner Content

Who will pay for off-road vehicle accidents, asks Sarah Crowther.  

In Vnuk v Zavarovalnica Triglav d.d, Case C-162/13 o n 13 August 2007, Mr Vnuk was working in a farmyard, on a ladder, when the ladder was struck by a trailer coupled to a tractor reversing across the yard in order to deliver hay bales to the nearby barn. 

Ray Purdy discusses how a new space detective agency can offer lawyers access to evidence from satellites & drones.  

Have you ever wished you could go back in time and see what was going on at a certain place at a particular time? 

The decision of the Privy Council in Fairfield Sentry v Migani is of considerable importance to funds which employ certification mechanisms.   

It will also be of note in relation to instruments employing market-based triggers, for example convertible loan notes. Here we discuss the implications of the decision for certification and those responsible for issuing such certificates. 

Imminent reform of the rules of jurisdiction and enforcement of foreign judgments in the European Union.  

A revised regime of jurisdiction and enforcement of foreign judgments will apply in the EU to proceedings commenced on or after 15 January 2015. This article considers key changes introduced by the recast Judgments Regulation and comments on their efficacy. 

Elspeth Talbot Rice QC and Andrew Holden ask who is a “trustee” for limitation purposes?  

Section 21(1) of the Limitation Act 1980 provides for there to be no period of limitation for claims by benefi ciaries under a trust in respect of a fraudulent breach of trust to which the trustee was party or privy, or to recover trust property in his hands. But who is a trustee for this purpose? In Williams v Central Bank of Nigeria, the Supreme Court decided that third party accessories to a breach of trust are not. In this article, we explore who is. In particular, we look at company directors, liquidators, and trustees in bankruptcy. 

Stephen Moverley Smith QC and Harry Sharpe ask when does coercion of a group to accept a proposal constitute oppression of the minority?  

This article compares the decisions in Assénagon v Irish Bank Resolution Corporation  and Azevedo v Imcopa Importacao  and asks what conclusions can be drawn about the application of minority oppression principles from the divergent treatment of two similar restructuring techniques. 

Chris Bath asks whether we need to look again at legal privilege and appropriate adults.  

Appropriate adults should be enabled to be present in police station legal consultations, without risk of detriment to the client. This was my conclusion after shadowing an appropriate adult (AA) during a PACE interview that might fairly be described as a slow motion car crash.  

Sleepwalking away from fair trials, John Cooper QC writes.  

In many respects we have been sleepwalking into a complete realignment of the fundamental principles of our criminal justice system and it is not that the process has been recent. 

Henry Morton Jack discusses fatal accidents abroad.  

The Supreme Court recently handed down judgment in  Cox v Ergo Versicherung AG (formerly known as Victoria)  [2014] UKSC 22, [2014] All ER (D) 16 (Apr) on a number of preliminary issues. The judgment concerns the law applicable to the assessment of damages suffered by dependants of a person killed in an accident abroad. 

Richard Adkinson welcomes judicial guidance on the thorny issue of the quantum of damages for breach of contract.  

In  Fulton Shipping Inc of Panama v Globalia Business Travel SAU  [2014] EWHC 1547 (Comm), [2014] All ER (D) 184 (May) the claimant, Fulton Shipping (the owner) managed a small cruise ship called the “New Flamenco”. It had chartered it to the defendant, Globalia Business (the charterer). In August 2005, the parties agreed to extend the charter to 28 October 2007 with an option for a third year. On 8 June 2007, it agreed to extend the charter to 2 November 2009.