Bank Notes

  • Home
  • News
  • Administration
  • Agency and Mandate
  • Bonds and Notes
  • Cheques and bills
  • Companies
  • Confidentiality
  • Consumer credit
  • Contract
  • Conversion
  • Data Protection
  • Default and demand
  • Documentary credits
  • Fiduciary duties
  • Financial Services Regulation
  • Fraud and economic torts
  • Guarantees and indemnities
  • Hire and asset finance
  • Injunctions
  • Insurance
  • Joint and vicarious liability
  • Limitation
  • Mistake
  • Money Laundering
  • Negligence and Advisory Liability
  • Partnership
  • Procedure
  • Receivership
  • Security
  • Trust and Accessory Liability
  • Unjust enrichment


A - Anti-suit injunctions


15/5/20

DAIICI CHUO KISEN KAISHA v CHUBB SEGUROS BRASIL SA [2020] EWHC 1223 (Comm)

Considers principles for grant of an anti-suit injunction and especially the impact of delay [49].


12/5/20

SAS INSTITUTE INC v WORLD PROGRAMMING LTD [2020] EWCA Civ 599

Considers principles applicable to anti-suit injunctions [90] and anti-enforcement injunctions [92].  Considers the importance of comity and delay [100].  An injunction should not have been granted to prevent an assignment of debts situated in the USA and there had been no good reason to restrain enforcement of a US judgment against those debts [120].  An injunction was justified in relation to debts situated in England [127].


5/3/20

TIMES TRADING CORP v NATIONAL BANK OF FUJAIRAH (DUBAI BRANCH) [2020] EWHC 1078 (Comm)

Considers the test for the issue of an anti-suit injunction restraining foreign proceedings [38], specifically in a case where the proceedings were said to have been brought contrary to a London arbitration clause but the defendant denied the existence of the contract.  An injunction was granted subject to a condition requiring the claimant to undertake not to rely on any time bar argument in the London arbitration [114].