News and Resources

COVID-19: Force Majeure and Frustration

7 / 4 / 2020

In light of the impact that COVID-19 is having on the ability of businesses to trade as normal, Ruhi Sethi-Smith explores the principles underlying the use of force majeure clauses and the doctrine of frustration.

Members of Forum Chambers advise on a wide range of commercial disputes, including contract, banking and finance, and insolvency. If we can be of any assistance, please do get in touch with us on the usual phone numbers and email addresses.

Download

COVID-19: Business and Property Courts Protocol on Remote Hearings

20 / 3 / 2020

In light of the continuing Covid-19 outbreak, the Business and Property Courts have provided a revised protocol on remote hearings.

We welcome this guidance and its commitment to moving to telephone and video hearings “wherever possible” so that the disputes that court users are facing can continue to progress at this unusual time.

Should you have any queries about an upcoming hearing, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Download

COVID-19: a message to our clients

20 / 3 / 2020

In light of the growing concerns around the current coronavirus outbreak, we wanted to reassure all of those who work with Forum that we have put in place a series of measures to protect the well-being of all of our clients, staff and members, while also making sure that we continue to offer the high level of legal services that you have come to expect from us.

Please see attached a message from the team at Forum Chambers.

Download

Push Payment Fraud: Singularis v Daiwa — Case Analysis

19 / 11 / 2019

David McIlroy explores the Supreme Court decision in Singularis Holdings Ltd (in liquidation) v Daiwa Capital Markets Europe Ltd [2019] UKSC 50 and considers its implications for Authorised Push Payment Fraud claims.

This case analysis looks at the extent of a bank’s Quincecare duty, the ability to attribute the dishonesty of the controlling mind in a ‘one-man company’ to the company itself, and the voluntary Contingent Reimbursement Model Code for Authorised Push Payment Scams.

Download

Secret Commissions: Wood v Commercial First Business — Case Analysis

12 / 11 / 2019

Nathan Webb examines the decision in Wood v Commercial First Business and explores its detailed review of the law on secret commissions.

The judgment addresses in particular the distinction between full secret commissions and so-called half-secret commissions. It clarifies the law in the area and solidifies the basis for a broker being held liable where a commission is only partially disclosed.

Download

Promontoria update: effectiveness of assignments

9 / 10 / 2019

Susanne Muth examines the decision in Nicoll v Promontoria and its impact on the scope for challenging the effectiveness and validity of assignments from Clydesdale Bank and other lenders.

In Nicoll v Promontoria (RAM2) Ltd [2019] EWHC 2410 (Ch), Mann J severely limited the scope of challenge. In summary, if Promontoria has given notice of the assignment to the debtor, and the assigning bank has confirmed by notice or has otherwise acknowledged that it considers the assignment complete, the debtor is not entitled to challenge the efficacy or validity of the assignment.

Download

Another Coat of Whitewash

14 / 6 / 2019

David McIlroy comments on the FCA’s report into its own ‘further investigative steps in relation to RBS GRG’.

Download

New Regulation Bad News for P2P Lenders

6 / 6 / 2019

Yesterday (4 June 2019) the FCA published its new rules for the P2P Lending sector. Susanne Muth explains the impact of these rules for P2P lenders and investors.

Download

Case Note: Perry v Raleys Solicitors — Nothing to Prove

7 / 5 / 2019

Susanne Muth examines the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Perry v Raleys Solicitors (A Firm) [2019] UKSC 5, which concerns the dividing line between issues of causation which concern the claimant’s own actions (which a claimant has to prove on the balance of probabilities) and issues of causation which concern the actions of third parties (which are to be assessed as a loss of a chance). 

Download

Berkeley Burke SIPP v FOS: High Court rejects challenge to FOS decision on SIPP mis-selling

8 / 11 / 2018

Susanne Muth considers the implications of the High Court’s recent rejection of a SIPP operator’s challenge to a FOS’s decision upholding a customer’s complaint about a mis-sold SIPP investment. The ruling is likely to result in a sharp increase in SIPP mis-selling complaints to the FOS.

Download
Page 1 2 3
icon-arrow-right icon-chevron-small-left-white icon-chevron-small-left icon-chevron-up icon-circle-arrow-right icon-linkedin icon-quote-marks icon-search-circle icon-search icon-twitter