In this blog, which follows on from Philip Mead’s recent post explaining the legal implications the Government’s recent White Paper (Cm 9593), Patrick Vincent suggests that the Lugano Convention has been wrongly worded and wrongly translated – but that even if corrected it will not help the UK achieve post-Brexit civil judicial cooperation with the EU. Continue reading Brexit and the Government White Paper: Are the Civil Judicial Cooperation plans Realistic?
The White Paper on The Future Relationship Between the United Kingdom and the European Union: Brexit Trifle or Dog’s Dinner?
This blog by Philip Mead of 12 King’s Bench Walk describes the approach adopted by the Government to negotiations with the EU as set out in the White Paper (Cm 9593) published on 12 July 2018, with particular reference to international and travel claims involving employment and personal injury. Continue reading The White Paper on The Future Relationship Between the United Kingdom and the European Union: Brexit Trifle or Dog’s Dinner?
AAA & ORS v (1) UNILEVER PLC (2) UNILEVER TEA KENYA LTD (2018) [2018] EWCA Civ 1532: the corporate veil remains a tightly woven garment
This blog is by Lois Aldred of 12 King’s Bench Walk.
The Court of Appeal recently handed down its judgment in AAA & Others v Unilever PLC and Unilever Tea Kenya Limited. This is the latest in a series of Court of Appeal considerations of the extent of corporate liability of parent companies for acts or omissions pertaining to the operations of subsidiaries.
The Claimants were employees of Unilever Tea Kenya Limited (‘UTKL’) who lived and worked on UTKL’s tea plantation in the southern Rift Valley of Kenya. They claimed against both Unilever and UTKL in tort for failing to protect them from the harm they suffered as a result of inter-tribal violence in the immediate aftermath of the 2007 Kenyan presidential election. Continue reading AAA & ORS v (1) UNILEVER PLC (2) UNILEVER TEA KENYA LTD (2018) [2018] EWCA Civ 1532: the corporate veil remains a tightly woven garment
12 KBW Middle-East Newsletter
The International & Travel team at 12 KBW recently produced a Middle-East Newsletter containing a number of articles that may also interest the readers of this blog.
The articles concern the 2017 Gulf crisis and its impact on regional aviation, the Package Travel and Linked Travel Arrangements Regulations 2018, delayed and cancelled flight claims, and DIFC employment law.
The Newsletter is available at the link below:
Novus Actus – Risk vs. Inconvenience – Philip Clay v TUI UK Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ
Mark Fanning of Miles Fanning Legal writes, in this guest blog, about his recent success in Philip Clay v TUI UK Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ where Ronald Walker QC of 12 King’s Bench Walk and Mark Fanning represented the Respondent.
The Court of Appeal gave judgment in favour of the Respondent in an interesting case considering the liability of a tour operator under the Package Travel, Package Holidays, and Package Tours Regulations 1992 (the “Package Travel Regulations”) for injury to the Appellant after a balcony fall. Continue reading Novus Actus – Risk vs. Inconvenience – Philip Clay v TUI UK Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ
Quantifying damages for human rights abuses by the MoD in Iraq (1) Alseran (2) Al-Waheed (3) MRE (4) KSU v Ministry of Defence [2017] EWHC 3289 (QB): aka Iraqi Civilian Litigation
This interesting blog post by Helen Waller a pupil barrister at 12 King’s Bench Walk considers in depth the legal analysis in the Iraqi Civilian Litigation. Continue reading Quantifying damages for human rights abuses by the MoD in Iraq (1) Alseran (2) Al-Waheed (3) MRE (4) KSU v Ministry of Defence [2017] EWHC 3289 (QB): aka Iraqi Civilian Litigation
The Package Travel Pre-action Protocol – Headlines for Practitioners
In this blog post, James Beeton of 12 King’s Bench Walk sets out the key features of the new Pre-action Protocol for the Resolution of Package Travel Claims. The main points to note are: (i) the extension to gastric illness claims of the fixed recoverable costs regime in Part 45, (ii) a prescriptive system of claims notification and response, (iii) accelerated disclosure obligations (including potentially onerous disclosure requirements on defendants) and (iv) confirmation that an expert medical report from a GP followed by Part 35 questions is likely to continue to represent the totality of the expert evidence in the vast majority of cases. Continue reading The Package Travel Pre-action Protocol – Headlines for Practitioners
