Santander UK plc v National Westminster Bank plc concerned the granting of various Norwich Pharmacal orders in favour of Santander UK plc against other banks, the customers of which wrongly received funds following mistaken electronic payments by Santander into the wrong accounts. Norwich Pharmacal orders allow an applicant to obtain an order from the court … Continue reading Norwich Pharmacal applications in the context of unjust enrichment and some practical advice

In Prophet plc v Huggett the Court of Appeal decided that the High Court should not have read words into and then enforced a post-termination restrictive covenant which, as originally drafted, offered the former employer no protection. The High Court granted an injunction enforcing a non-compete post-termination restrictive covenant which stopped Huggett from joining a … Continue reading High Court should not have read words into badly drafted restrictive covenant

In Bakir v Downe, Mr Justice Mostyn, sitting in the Family Division of the High Court, has delivered a succinct and pointed judgment confirming that an undertaking given in the face of the court need not be signed to be enforceable, or to be recorded in the court’s order. Mr Downe (who was at times … Continue reading An undertaking given in the face of the court need not be signed; and a firm reminder for litigants in person to follow the court’s procedure

Following the entry into force of the Public Contracts (Amendment) Regulations 2009, which implemented the new public procurement Remedies Directive, an aggrieved economic operator who wishes to prevent a contract award no longer needs to apply for an interim injunction.  Under the new rules, a standstill period of at least 10 to 15 calendar days … Continue reading Court of Appeal applies American Cyanamid principles in rejecting application to lift automatic contract suspension

EU Regulation No. 655/2014, dated 15 May 2014, established a European Account Preservation Order (“EAPO”) procedure to facilitate cross-border debt recovery in civil and commercial matters.  Here are eight things you need to know about the Regulation: It came into force on 17 July 2014 and will be applied by participating Member State courts from … Continue reading Eight things you need to know about the EU Regulation establishing a European Account Preservation Order procedure

JSC BTA Bank v Ablyazov concerned an application by BTA Bank for the costs of compliance with a Norwich Pharmacal order to be paid by the respondent, Mr Tyschenko. Mr Tyschenko was a Ukrainian businessman with interests in a range of oil, gas, banking and real estate assets. The bank’s case was that he was … Continue reading Norwich Pharmacal orders: when respondent can be ordered to pay applicant’s costs

The expense of international commercial fraud litigation has encouraged many litigators, in the last decade or so, to employ what might be called “sanction-focused litigation” where the focus is not necessarily on proceeding to a full trial of the action but on asserting (appropriate) pressure on the defendant through court-ordered sanctions for disobedience to court … Continue reading The use of contempt and other sanctions in modern commercial fraud cases

For the first time, an appellate court has given clear guidance on the applicable principles for the assessment of damages under a cross-undertaking in damages. In Hone v Abbey Forwarding Ltd, the Court of Appeal considered a claim for compensation in relation to a freezing injunction that had been wrongfully obtained. At first instance, HHJ … Continue reading Approach to assessment of damages pursuant to a cross-undertaking

The recent decision of the Court of Appeal in Bank St Petersburg OJSC v Vitaly Arkhangelsky is a rare example of an English court granting an anti-enforcement injunction to enjoin a party from enforcing a foreign judgment, albeit on an interim basis. The starting point for the decision was in Russia, where the claimant obtained … Continue reading The Court of Appeal grants rare anti-enforcement injunction

In Lakatamia Shipping Co Ltd v Nobu Su and others, a worldwide freezing order obtained by the claimant against the defendants stated: The defendants must not: Remove from England and Wales any of their assets which are in England and Wales up to the value of US$ 48,824,440.24; or In any way dispose of, deal … Continue reading Freezing assets of non-defendant companies of which a defendant is a shareholder/director

A blog to report on the important and developing area of the law as it relates to injunctions