REUTERS | GCS

The defence of illegality has long been considered available to negligent practitioners where an underlying fraud has been committed by their clients, but the courts have shown they are no longer willing to let lawyers or their insurers use it as a get out of jail free card.

In a unanimous judgment handed down by Lord Lloyd-Jones last month, the Supreme Court considered the defence of illegality in Stoffel & Co v Grondona, developing the Court of Appeal’s application of the principles set down in the Supreme Court’s decision in Patel v Mirza.

Continue reading

REUTERS | REUTERS/John Sibley

From 1 January 2021, lenders may reconsider whether it is desirable to include in their finance documents “asymmetric” or “one-way” jurisdiction clauses that grant English courts exclusive jurisdiction to decide disputes, subject to the option of the lender to sue the borrower in any other jurisdiction it wishes. Such clauses are widely used in financial instruments such as loan agreements, their aim being to ensure that creditors can always litigate in a debtor’s home court, where the debtor’s assets are located, or anywhere else a creditor might prefer, and to reassure a creditor that it can only be sued in its preferred jurisdiction.

Continue reading