Who (if anyone) is liable when an artificial intelligence (AI)-powered trading / investment system causes substantial losses for an investor? The English courts are currently considering this question for the first time in the case of Tyndaris v VWM, which is due for trial next year.
In an earlier blog post, I suggested that practitioners would be well advised to follow the view expressed by Andrew Baker J in BB Energy (Gulf) DMCC v Mohammed Hussein Al Amoudi and others, that permission is required to adduce expert evidence at an interlocutory hearing. The question has been asked whether that remains the … Continue reading Adducing expert evidence at freezing injunction and security for costs hearings: further thoughts on BB Energy (Gulf) DMCC v Mohammed Hussein Al Amoudi and others
Parties often seek to rely upon expert evidence, in particular evidence of foreign law, at interlocutory hearings. Commonly, an expert report will be adduced even though the expert is not expected to attend, or be cross-examined at, the hearing. Such hearings very often occur at an early stage in proceedings, in particular in applications for … Continue reading Is permission required to adduce expert evidence at an interlocutory hearing?
Newspapers today are filled with headlines about the rise of artificial intelligence (AI) and robots. We are usually told that AI is going to take our jobs or take over the world. Both those topics are important, but they tend to obscure the debate on a more immediate issue: how can legal systems accommodate AI, … Continue reading Responsibility for robots
In Manchester Building Society v Grant Thornton UK LLP, the Commercial Court held that the defendant, a firm of accountants, was not liable for substantial losses suffered on unprofitable transactions which had been entered into as a consequence of advice received from the defendant, even though the losses were foreseeable and caused by the negligent … Continue reading Manchester Building Society v Grant Thornton UK LLP: how far are professionals liable for the consequences of their advice?
How much does an applicant for a freezing order need to tell the English court about other claims it is conducting abroad? This is a significant question for any lawyer involved in cross-border litigation, and was the main issue at stake in the High Court decision in Banca Turco Romana v Kamuran Cortuk and others.