The vast majority of charter parties will include in their terms a lien clause which confers on the owner a lien over sub-freight (and sometimes sub-hire), for any amounts due to the owner under the head charter party. If the owner exercises his lien, sums which would otherwise be payable by the sub-charterer to the charterer under the sub-charter party, should instead become directly payable to the owner.

In Tiuta International Limited (in liquidation) v De Villiers Surveyors Limited [2017] UKSC 77 the Supreme Court reminded us that the measure of damages is that which is required to restore the claimant as nearly as possible to the position that he would have been in if he had not sustained the wrong.

The Court of Appeal overturns the High Court decision concerning an ATE insurance policy lacking anti-avoidance provisions as adequate security for costs.

Case Alert - [2017] EWCA Civ 1872

Court of Appeal orders security for costs where ATE insurance policy did not contain an anti-avoidance provision

Court of Appeal sets out test for whether defendant has assets for a freezing order application and considers the impact of delay in applying

The case

The receiver of a bankrupt joint-stock company sued its directors before the Court of Rome, in order to ascertain their liability, pursuant to Article 146 of Bankruptcy Law.

More precisely, the bankruptcy was considered the result of a transaction particularly burdensome with respect to the company’s share capital and unjustified in relation to the economic value of the block of shares acquired.

Summer is over and Autumn is truly upon us bringing back many of the winds that seemed die down in the golden summer of Macron. Eurosceptic parties have made electoral gains in Germany and in Austria and the same has now happened in the Czech Republic. The hope that Macron and Merkel could push forward a strong integrationist agenda have faded somewhat as the German liberal party (and possibly the German Supreme Court) fight against common budgets and fiscal transfers.

Applicable law

High Court holds that an Insolvency Exclusion applies in respect of a claim under the Third Parties (Rights Against Insurers) Act 1930 (“1930 Act”) and awards summary judgment accordingly but declines to provide much-needed guidance on insurers’ liability in the case of claims partially settled by the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (“FSCS”).

Case Alert ‐ [2017] EWHC 2597 (Comm)

Court confirms insurance policy exclusions are not construed narrowly/scope of an insolvency clause

The claimants brought a claim under the Third Parties (Rights against Insurers) Act 1930 against the professional indemnity insurers of their financial adviser. The adviser gave allegedly negligent investment advice in respect of bonds issued by a company which then went into liquidation (and so defaulted on payments due to the claimants).