A rather curious judgment was handed down last month by the CJEU, concerning the 2001 Brussels Regulation. At first glance, the decision is not surprising. It merely confirms that the EU has moved with the times and, outside the business-to-consumer context at least, has permitted jurisdiction agreements to be communicated by “click wrapping”. This means allowing them to be seen by clicking on a hyperlink rather than appearing automatically on a web page or being sent to a party in hard copy or by fax or email. But incidentally, the judgment also highlights the inconsistency of different language versions of EU legislation, and serves as a warning not to rely exclusively on English language ones. Continue reading


Logic tells us if you discover a party has deceived you for gain, you should be able to do something to recover your loss. In the context of a party obtaining such a gain through the award of a judgment or a settlement in proceedings, logic again may suggest that this subsequent discovery of fraud on the part of the benefiting party would give you a route to unravel the benefit they have gained without too much challenge. Continue reading

We recently received a query through our Ask service on the interpretation of CPR 6.14 and how to correctly calculate the deemed date of service of the claim form. At first glance, I thought that the answer was obvious, but as I considered the issue more closely, I realised that there was in fact room for argument and that perhaps the CPR is not as clear on this point as it could be. Continue reading