Stefanie Fay的动态

Today, the German Federal Council passed the law already adopted by the German Parliament to introduce a new leading decision procedure at the Federal Court of Justice. The new procedure is now about to come into force and aims to improve the handling of mass claims proceedings. In the future, the FCJ will be able to select a suitable appeal procedure and decide on it even if the parties have terminated the proceedings. But is this likely to relief the courts of their high number of mass claims cases and what impact will the new procedure have on lower court proceedings? Our new blog post provides answers to these questions and a detailed explanation of the leading decision procedure. Freshfields, Martina de Lind van Wijngaarden, Stefanie Fay, Carolin Lukasewitz, Camillo von Haugwitz, Sarah Hillebrand https://lnkd.in/dMeJfG4h #massclaims #collectiveaction

REYNOLDS -v- HIGGINS [2024] WASC 260 at 87-90 …I would have to be living under a rock not to know, that litigation involving Ms Higgins is litigated as much in the public arena as it is in the courts: court documents are provided to media outlets prior to their being served or even filed... The Court, however, can and should control the dissemination of private and sensitive documents that have neither been tendered nor adduced in evidence. This is particularly so in relation to documents produced under compulsion such as will occur in this case. Given the history of this and related matters, and the voracious appetite for such documents concerning Ms Higgins, I consider that it is in the interests of justice to require express, rather than implied, undertakings as to the possession and use of any documents discovered… my preliminary view is that the document or documents discovered should be provided to a single nominated practitioner..following the provision by the practitioner of a signed undertaking to the Court that he or she will retain possession and control of the document, not copy the document and not communicate the contents of the document, save for the purpose of taking instructions..and commencing the proposed proceedings (and for no other purpose). I

Our Managing Director?John Astill?provided insights to?The Times about the judgement in ???? ???????????????? ?? ???? ???????????soon to be handed down in one of the most important class action cases at the UK Competition Appeal Tribunal and the UK’s first opt-out group action under the Competition Act; a judgment that could set a new precedent in the UK's class action landscape. The outcome holds major implications for the litigation funding industry and will likely shape approaches to similar claims against other large corporations. especially regarding how damages are allocated. This landmark case, led by consumer advocate Justin Le Patourel seeks ￡1.3 billion in compensation for three million BT customers, including many elderly and vulnerable individuals. Read the full article below. #Litigation #CompetitionLaw #ClassActions #GroupLitigation #LitigationFunding #LitigationFinance #ThirdPartyFunding #IndependentView

Take a look at my colleague John Astill's interesting and timely article published in The Times today regarding the keenly anticipated judgment in the Le Patourel v BT class action. #litigationfunding #litigationfinance #collectiveactions #competitionlitigation

How to serve claims on defendants in a different jurisdiction by Katherine David and Michael Green #commercial #contracts #disputes #commercialdisputes #commerciallitigation #jurisdiction #claims #law #legal

Suit for recovery on the basis of cheque... Ex-parte proceedings---Judgment, passing of---Court, powers of--"Court having no option but to decree the sult"---Scope---Trial Court, after conducting ex-parte proceedings against the defendant / appellant, decreed the suit in favour of plaintiff /respondent---Validity---Trial Court while decreeing the suit, in concluding paragraph, observed that Coun was left with no option but to decree the suit---Sald observation, on the face of it, was contrary to law as not only in an ex-parte case/instance, but even in case of a conceding statement, it is obligatory for the court to appreciate the veracity of the claim of the respondent/ plaintiff---Court is under obligation to see the legality and genuineness of the issue brought before it---Observation that Court was left with no option reflected dealing with the cause in a mechanical manner without application of judicial mind---High Court set-aside the impugned ex-parte judgment and decree and remanded the case to the Trial Court for decision on merits and directed that the application for leave to appear and defend the suit filed by the appellant/defendant would be deemed to have been allowed on the basis of surety bond having been tendered before the High/Appellate Court--- SAAD MUHAMMAD ABBASI versus Syed EJAZ ALI R.F.A. No. 286 of 2022, 2024 MLD 1501

Application by David Davidson Financial Services Pty Ltd & Ors (as trustees of various trusts) [2024] VSC 445 (31 July 2024)Interesting decision with a useful summary of? principles concerning judicial advice applications; Beddoe order applications; and distinction between justification orders and indemnity orders.? The decision also reaffirms that where confidential judicial advice is sought, another party's application to be joined to oppose - on the basis that the granting of the judicial advice application may result in expense to the detriment of beneficiaries - is unlikely to succeed. https://lnkd.in/gea-KvRz?

What are the key procedural steps to take when serving a claim against a defendant who lives in a different jurisdiction? In the second of a two-part series, this valuable guide from Katherine David and Michael Green in our Commercial Disputes team navigates you through serving claims with parties in different #jurisdictions and the procedural steps you need to take. ? #HamlinsLLP #CommercialDisputes https://lnkd.in/e6ap__7J

Few legal issues have sparked more consternation among Georgia insurers (and insurance defense counsel) than pre-suit, time-limited settlement demands that are intended as bad-faith setups. These demands are a maze of terms and conditions that require insurers to upend standard settlement practices and cause inadvertent rejections or counteroffers. Armed with an inadvertent rejection, plaintiff’s counsel sets up a bad faith failure to settle claim. Georgia’s Legislature recently revised O.C.G.A. § 9-11-67.1, and our attorneys Kim Jackson, Zachary Lewis, and Garrett Anderson discuss the impact of the statute on procedures governing pre-suit settlement offers. Read more in Georgia’s New Time-Limited Demand Statute: Is the Third Time the Charm?

There have been a lot of headlines about a recent hearing at the Court of Protection, with some claiming it raises questions about jurisdiction and the interplay between the Court of Protection and the civil courts. But what was the Judgment really all about and what does it mean for reverse indemnities in PPOs? Read our latest article where Clyde's Heather Dale and Joanna Lamb break it down and look at the possible impacts on future cases. Heather and Joanna are members of Clyde's Actuarial SMG and Court of Protection SMG respectively. #ClydeCo #PPOs #CourtofProtection