Dispute Resolution analysis: The High Court has provided concise guidance as to how misrepresentation should be analysed when considering jurisdictional gateways. Under Article 5(3) of the Lugano Convention, in negligent misstatement cases, the place of the event giving rise to damage is normally the place where the misstatement was communicated to the claimant. However, if the statement was made and received in different places, then it is the place of making or sending of the communication, rather than its receipt, which is the place of the event. In this case it resulted in the court declining English jurisdiction. Written by Angharad Parry, barrister, at Twenty Essex.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial
EXISTING USER? SIGN IN CONTINUE READING GET A QUOTE
To read the full news article, register for a free Lexis+ trial
**Trials are provided to all LexisNexis content, excluding Practice Compliance, Practice Management and Risk and Compliance, subscription packages are tailored to your specific needs. To discuss trialling these LexisNexis services please email customer service via our online form. Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK, Ireland and selected UK overseas territories and Caribbean countries. We may terminate this trial at any time or decide not to give a trial, for any reason. Trial includes one question to LexisAsk during the length of the trial.
* denotes a required field
Dispute Resolution analysis: The High Court has provided concise guidance as to how misrepresentation should be analysed when considering jurisdictional gateways. Under Article 5(3) of the Lugano Convention, in negligent misstatement cases, the place of the event giving rise to damage is normally
Negligence—key elements to establish a negligence claimThis Practice Note outlines the key elements for establishing a claim in negligence. For specific guidance on negligence in the context of company/parent company liability, banks and in professional negligence cases, see:•Practice Note: Tortious
Dispute Resolution analysis: A petitioner claiming unfair prejudice is entitled to rely on breaches by the directors of their fiduciary and statutory duties to the company as conduct of the affairs of the company which was unfairly prejudicial to the petitioner. In this case, Zedra (the petitioner)
The doctrine of res judicataWhat is a res judicata?A res judicata is a decision given by a judge or tribunal with jurisdiction over the cause of action and the parties, which disposes, with finality, of a matter decided so that it cannot be re-litigated by those bound by the judgment, except on
0330 161 1234