In this post, Sarah Coates-Madden, Senior Associate at CMS, and Fiona Dalling, Associate at CMS, preview the decision awaited from the Supreme Court in Davies v Bridgend County Borough Council. Introduction 9 August 1850 saw the arrival at Kew Gardens of a set of 40 new plants from Leiden, Germany. Among them, a discovery from a recent trip to Japan. Named Polygonum sieboldii (the discoverer, Herr Siebold, apparently not shy of self-promotion), this is the first record available of the appearance of Japanese knotweed in Britain. A commercial success, knotweed was exalted by vendors for its goo ..read more

In this post, Stephanie Woods, Senior Associate at CMS, and Holly Ranfield, Associate at CMS, preview the decision awaited from the Supreme Court in RTI Ltd v MUR Shipping BV. Factual Background MUR Shipping BV (“MUR”), the shipowners, and RTI Ltd (“RTI”), the charterers, entered into a contract of affreightment in June 2016. Under the contract, RTI agreed to ship and MUR agreed to carry bauxite from Guinea to Ukraine.  It was a term of the contract that RTI would pay freight in the sum of US $12 per metric ton. The contract provided that “neither Owners nor Charterers shall be liable to ..read more

In this post, Pippa Borton, Associate at CMS, previews the decision awaited from the Supreme Court in Hirachand v Hirachand and Anor. Factual Background and First Instance Decision This case concerns an appeal to the Supreme Court against an award granted pursuant to the Inheritance (Provision for Family Dependents) Act 1975 (“the 1975 Act”). Mr Navinchandra Hirachand (“the Deceased”) died in 2016, leaving his entire estate to his wife, Mrs Nalini Hirachand (“the Appellant”). Mrs Hirachand’s estranged daughter (“the Respondent”), who suffers from severe mental illness and does not work, made a ..read more

In this post, Adam Ferris (Senior Associate) in the Finance Disputes Team at CMS and Henry Powell (Associate) in the Real Estate Disputes Team at CMS comment on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Byers and Ors v Saudi National Bank [2023] UKSC 51, which was handed down on 20 December 2023. Summary The Supreme Court has clarified the principles applicable to a claim for knowing receipt. Knowing receipt is an equitable personal claim which can be brought against a person who has received property transferred to them in breach of trust. The principal elements of such a claim are that: A truste ..read more

Background In this post, Mark Whiteside, Partner at CMS, and Johanna Dodgson, Associate at CMS, comment on the Supreme Court’s judgment in Target Group Ltd v Commissions for His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs [2023] UKSC 35. Shawbrook Bank Limited (“Shawbrook”) is a provider of mortgages and loans. The appellant Target Group Ltd (“Target”) administers loans made by Shawbrook, including by operating individual loan accounts and instigating and processing payments due from borrowers. The principal issue was whether the services provided by Target qualified for exemption under the Value Added Tax ..read more

Overview On 17 January 2024, the Supreme Court handed down  judgment in Herculito Maritime Ltd & Ors v Gunvor International BV & Ors unanimously dismissing the appeal. In this post David McKie, Partner at CMS, comments on that judgment. The case concerned whether cargo owners who were receivers under bills of lading had to make to the shipowner carrier a contribution in General Average to a ransom payment paid to Somali pirates for the release of the ship.  Cargo owners had resisted contribution on the basis that  the terms of war risks clauses in a voyage charterpa ..read more

In this case, Madison Ingram, a Trainee Solicitor in the technology & media team at CMS, comments on the Supreme Court decision in Potanina v Potanin [2024] UKSC 3, which was handed down on 31 January 2024. The Supreme Court decided, by a 3-2 majority, to overturn the decision of the Court of Appeal, and allow the appeal sought. In doing so, the court made rather impactful comments of which essentially alter the practice which has been followed in the process of setting aside leave under section 13 of Part III of the Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984 (“the 1984 Act”). Background ..read more

In this post, Emma Pinkerton, a Partner in the Real Estate Disputes team at CMS, comments on the Supreme Court’s decision in Wolverhampton City Council and others v London Gypsies and Travellers and others [2023] UKSC 47, which was handed down on 29 November 2023. In our Case Preview we discussed the background to this case in more detail but in summary the primary focus of the Supreme Court was in relation to the apparent distinction between interim and final injunctions and the impact of the grant of either on “newcomers”.  “Newcomers” are considered to be people who haven’t yet done, o ..read more

In this case, Catherine McAndrew, a Senior Associate in the Insurance and Reinsurance team at CMS, comments on the Supreme Court’s decision in TUI Limited v Griffiths [2023] UKSC 48I, which was handed down on 29 November 2023. The Supreme Court considered whether it was open to a court to reject evidence, in this case expert medical evidence, which was disputed but which had not been tested by cross-examination. The claimant’s expert report supported the causation of his injury, but the expert had not been required by the defendant to give oral evidence.   The Supreme Court concluded that ..read more

In this post, Liz Jackson, Trainee Solicitor, and Max Wiktorsson, Associate, in the Employment Team at CMS, comment on the decision from the Supreme Court in Independent Workers Union of Great Britain v Central Arbitration Committee and Anor. [2023] UKSC 43. The case was heard by the Supreme Court on 25 and 26 April 2023 and judgment was handed down on 21 November 2023. The Supreme Court held that a group of Deliveroo delivery riders were not in an employment relationship with Deliveroo, and as a result, they could not rely on the trade union rights conferred by ECHR, art 11. The Law Domestic ..read more