ÃÛÌÒÊÓƵ

Expert Analysis

• Russia Ruling Shows UK's Robust Jurisdiction Approach

  

  An English High Court's recent decision to grant an anti-suit injunction in the Russia-related dispute Renaissance Securities v. Chlodwig Enterprises clearly illustrates that obtaining an injunction will likely be more straightforward when the seat is in England compared to when it is abroad, say lawyers at Linklaters.

• EU Rejection Of Booking.com Deal Veers From Past Practice

  

  The European Commission's recent prohibition of Booking's purchase of Etraveli based on ecosystem theories of harm reveals a lower bar for prohibiting nonhorizontal mergers, and may mean increased merger scrutiny for companies with entrenched market positions in digital markets, say lawyers at Linklaters.

• PPI Ruling Spells Trouble For Financial Services Firms

  

  The Supreme Court's recent decision in Canada Square v. Potter, which found that the claimant's missold payment protection insurance claim was not time-barred, is bad news for affected financial services firms, as there is now certainty over the law on the postponement of limitation periods, rendering hidden commission claims viable, say Ian Skinner and Chris Webber at Squire Patton.

• UPC Decision Highlights Key Security Costs Questions

  

  While the Unified Patent Court recently ordered NanoString to pay €300,000 as security for Harvard's legal costs in a revocation action dispute, the decision highlights that the outcome of a security for costs application will be highly fact-dependent and that respondents should prepare to set out their financial position in detail, says Tom Brazier at EIP.

• Extradition Ruling Hints At Ways Around High Burden Of Proof

  

  The U.K. Supreme Court's recent ruling in Popoviciu v. Curtea De Apel Bucharest confirmed that, in a conviction extradition case, the requested person must establish a flagrant violation of their right to a fair trial, but the court's reasoning reveals creative opportunities to test this boundary in the U.K. and Strasbourg alike, says Rebecca Hughes at Corker Binning.

• IP Ruling Could Pave Way For AI Patents In UK

  

  If implemented by the U.K. ÃÛÌÒÊÓƵ Office, the High Court's recent ruling in Emotional Perception AI v. Comptroller-General of Patents, holding that artificial neural networks can be patented, could be a first step to welcoming AI patents in the U.K., say Arnie Francis and Alexandra Brodie at Gowling.

• UK Review May Lead To Lower Investment Screening Burden

  

  The government’s current review of national security investment screening rules aims to refine the scope of mandatory notifications required for unproblematic deals, and is likely to result in much-needed modifications to minimize the administrative burden on businesses and investors, say lawyers at Simpson Thacher.

• What Prince Harry Privacy Case May Mean For Media Ethics

  

  An English High Court recently allowed the privacy case brought by Prince Harry and six other claimants against the Daily Mail publisher to proceed, which, if successful, could embolden other high-profile individuals to bring claims and lead to renewed calls for a judicial public inquiry into British press ethics, says Philippa Dempster at Freeths.

• How European Authorities Are Foiling Anti-Competitive Hiring

  

  Lawyers at Squire Patton discuss key labor practice antitrust concerns and notable regulation trends in several European countries following recent enforcement actions brought by the European Commission and U.K. Competition and Markets Authority.

• When Can Bonuses Be Clawed Back?

  

  The High Court's recent decision in Steel v. Spencer should remind employees that the contractual conditions surrounding bonuses and the timing of any resignation must be carefully considered, as in certain circumstances, bonuses can and are being successfully clawed back by employers, say Merrill April and Rachael Parker at CM Murray.

• The State Of UK Litigation Funding After Therium Ruling

  

  The recent English High Court decision in Therium v. Bugsby Property has provided a glimmer of hope for litigation funders about how courts will interpret this summer's U.K. Supreme Court ruling that called funding agreements impermissible, suggesting that its adverse effects may be mitigated, says Daniel Williams at DWF Law.

• Trial By AI Could Be Closer Than You Think

  

  In a known first for the U.K., a Court of Appeal justice recently admitted to using ChatGPT to write part of a judgment, highlighting how AI could make the legal system more efficient and enable the judicial process to record more accurate and fair decisions, say Charles Kuhn and Neide Lemos at Clyde & Co.

• Why It's Urgent For Pharma Cos. To Halt Counterfeit Meds

  

  With over 10.5 million counterfeit medicines seized in the EU in 2023, it is vital both ethically and commercially that pharmaceutical companies take steps to protect against such infringements, including by invoking intellectual property rights protection, says Lars Karnøe at Potter Clarkson.

• Nix Of $11B Award Shows Limits Of Arbitral Process

  

  A recent English High Court decision in Nigeria v. Process & Industrial Developments, overturning an arbitration award because it was obtained by fraud, is a reminder that arbitration decisions are ultimately still accountable to the courts, and that the relative simplicity of the arbitration rules is not necessarily always a benefit, say Robin Henry and Abbie Coleman at Collyer Bristow.

• How The Netherlands Became A Hub For EU Class Actions

  

  As countries continue to implement the European Union Collective Redress Directive, the Netherlands — the country with the largest class action docket in the EU — provides a real-world example of what class and mass litigation may eventually look like in the bloc, say lawyers at Faegre Drinker and Houthoff.