English Court grants injunction restraining subconscious use of confidential information

The High Court has granted an injunction preventing an in-house lawyer from acting in proceedings adverse to her former employer: Western Avenue Properties Ltd v Soni [2017] EWHC 2650 (QB). The judge accepted that the defendant was well aware of her professional responsibility of continuing confidentiality and was unlikely to have any conscious intention to… via High Court prevents in-house lawyer acting against former employer due to risk of subconscious use of confidential information — Herbert Smith Freehills – Litigation notes Advertisements Continue reading English Court grants injunction restraining subconscious use of confidential information

Dishonesty: objective or subjective?

The Supreme Court has held that the correct test for dishonesty in criminal proceedings is whether or not the defendant’s conduct is dishonest by the objective standards of ordinary reasonable and honest people: Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd t/a Crockfords [2017] UKSC 67. Albeit that the Court did not need to rule on the… via Supreme Court restates test for dishonesty in criminal proceedings — Herbert Smith Freehills – Litigation notes Continue reading Dishonesty: objective or subjective?

Opinion evidence on Bermuda law in foreign Court proceedings: should it be given by a Single Joint Expert Witness?

In Peace Mark (Holdings) Ltd v Patrick et al [2017] HKCFI 1934, Hon Anthony Chan J of the Hong Kong High Court has held that expert opinion evidence on various issues of Bermuda law (particularly Bermudian company law relating to directors’ duties and rights of indemnity) should be given by a Single Joint Expert (i.e. a single expert instructed jointly by all of the parties, rather than separate experts instructed by the different parties). The Hong Kong Court’s discretionary power to appoint a Single Joint Expert in appropriate cases is no doubt a beneficial one, in the interests of the … Continue reading Opinion evidence on Bermuda law in foreign Court proceedings: should it be given by a Single Joint Expert Witness?

Direct rule by the UK – the ultimate ‘sanction’ for British Overseas Territories?

The BBC has recently reported that Sir Vince Cable, the leader of the Liberal Democrats party in the UK, has repeated his 2016 suggestion of the following ‘solution’ to the ‘problem’ evidenced by the ‘Paradise Papers’ (what the precise problem is perceived to be is not quite clear). “Give them time to get their house in order and if necessary have sanctions to bring them into line and the ultimate sanction would be to impose direct rule on them.“ This seems rather simplistic and misguided, in my view (and, I think, in the views of other scholars more expert than … Continue reading Direct rule by the UK – the ultimate ‘sanction’ for British Overseas Territories?

The “Paradise Papers”: some footnotes from a Bermuda Legal perspective

I don’t propose to publish a list of links to all of the various websites that have published, and are still publishing, stories about the ‘Paradise Papers’: obviously, one central source is http://www.icij.org , and a simple Google search with a few keywords will point readers in the right direction. But a couple of thoughts of my own, if I may. Starting with the obvious: Tax avoidance (lawful) and tax evasion (unlawful) are not the same thing. There may be ‘moral’ and ‘immoral’ tax avoidance: but ‘beauty’ is in the eye of the ‘assessor’, and to some extent, the media’s … Continue reading The “Paradise Papers”: some footnotes from a Bermuda Legal perspective

More on Browne v Dunn from an Australian perspective

Professor Hampel has been telling me recently that the rule in the House of Lords’ judgment in Browne v Dunn (1893) 6 R 67 is much mis-understood by advocates and decision makers alike. Another judge apparently gives a talk to the participants in the Victorian Bar’s readers course each intake emphasising the narrowness of the… via Is there an obligation to put in cross-examination that the witness is lying? — The Australian Professional Liability Blog Continue reading More on Browne v Dunn from an Australian perspective

Public interest advocacy in action in the U.K. – a model for the BOTs?

What follows is the text of a Press Release issued last night. *** The Good Law Project has initiated proceedings in the High Court to establish whether the Electoral Commission failed in its duty to uphold UK election law during the EU Referendum. The Good Law Project is asking the Court to find that the […] via Electoral Commission sued in High Court over EU Referendum — Waiting for Godot Continue reading Public interest advocacy in action in the U.K. – a model for the BOTs?