Consequential consequences redux
Following a High Court decision in 2016, it appears the law regarding excluding liability for indirect or consequential loss may not be as clear as Stuart Pemble previously thought
164 Search results found
Brexit: overture to a discordant symphony
As Brexit turbulence begins, three disputes highlight some of the lesser-known legal consequences
Legal notes: You couldn’t make it up
Stuart Pemble marvels at what could be the strangest decision he has ever had to read
Legal notes: Matters of fact
Mitigation of damages is governed by clear principles, but courts can face difficulties when applying those principles to the facts of any dispute
A legal Christmas carol
Allyson Colby, James Driscoll and Stuart Pemble are in high spirits at the end of another busy year, drawing on literary inspiration to unleash a Dickens of a Legal Notes Christmas special
Legal notes: ‘but for’ what, exactly?
The simple “but for” test in negligence can tax the sharpest legal minds. Challenge accepted, writes Stuart Pemble
A morality tale for our times
The Supreme Court has changed the law regarding the enforceability of illegal transactions.
Legal notes: Do clauses prohibiting the oral variation of written contracts work?
Stuart Pemble reports that the Court of Appeal has decided the answer to this conundrum appears to be “no”
Legal notes: Consequential consequences
Stuart Pemble welcomes confirmation from the Court of Appeal that parties should be free to agree contractual limitations to, or exclusions of, indirect or consequential loss
Legal notes: Claimants, do your duty
The Court of Appeal has provided welcome clarity regarding a claimant’s duty to mitigate its loss. Stuart Pemble summarises the good news
