< Back to insights hub

Article

Commercial Disputes Weekly – Issue 512 November 2019

Share this Page

BITE SIZE KNOW HOW FROM THE ENGLISH COURTS

Damages
The English Commercial Court has found that while it was appropriate to take steps to enforce a negative covenant not to trade a vessel, the claimant seller was only entitled to nominal damages for past breaches of the covenant – this was not one of the occasions where negotiating damages would be available.
Priyanka Shipping Limited v Glory Bulk Carriers PTE Limited

Funding
In a useful clarification of the principles applicable to non-party costs orders, the English High Court has found that when determining the extent of a third party funder’s liability for such costs under the so-called “Arkin cap”, sums advanced to fund the payment of interim costs orders should be included in the calculation.
Burnden Holdings (UK) Limited (in liquidation) & Anr v Fielding & Anr

Litigation
Reminding parties of the impact of the open justice principle, the English High Court has found there was a realistic prospect a member of the public could have successfully applied to obtain a document that was put in evidence and referred to in open court, meaning that there was a real prospect a court would hold the document to be so generally accessible it could no longer be regarded as confidential or private.
Maroil Trading, Inc. & Anr v Cally Shipholdings, Inc. & Ors

Maritime
In an important marine insurance judgment, the English Commercial Court has confirmed settled industry practice that a defence of actionable fault under Rule D of the York-Antwerp Rules will be available to an insurer under a general average guarantee in the AAA/ILU standard form.
Navalmar UK Limited v Ergo Versicherung AG & Anr (“BSLE Sunrise”)

FOR MORE INFORMATION

Should you wish to discuss any of these cases in further detail, please speak with a member of our London dispute resolution team below, or your regular contact at Watson Farley & Williams:

Keep in touch