Blog
Kingsley Napley’s Medical Negligence Team ‘walks together’ with the Dame Vera Lynn Children’s Charity
Sharon Burkill
In the recent case of Transport for Greater Manchester v Thales Transport & Security Ltd [2012] EWHC 3717 (TCC), the High Court considered the extent to which a supplier must disclose information pursuant to an audit clause under a contract for the supply of goods and services.
A sound understanding of legal professional privilege provides a strategic advantage allowing, (when used adequately), a “client” and its/his lawyer to refuse to disclose privileged documents and/or communications and/or to answer questions relating to their subject matter. Here are the 'need to know' issues.
Earlier this week, the High Court considered a claim for compensation pursuant to a cross undertaking in damages in relation to a freezing order which was subsequently discharged. The court confirmed the principle previously set out in Hoffmann-La Roche & Co v Secretary of State [1975] AC 295 at 361; that damages in injunctive proceedings should be assessed in the same way as damages for breach of contract.
In its recent decision Michaud v France dated 6 December 2012 (Requête No.12323/11), the European Court of Human Rights (the “Court”) confirmed that French advocates, like any other lawyers authorised to practise within the European Member States, must comply with certain obligations aimed at effectively detecting and fighting against money laundering activities.
Sharon Burkill
Natalie Cohen
Caroline Sheldon
Skip to content Home About Us Insights Services Contact Accessibility