Latest Dispute Resolution News
Zalina Kanametova v OSG Records Management [Europe] Limited [2026] EWHC 1196 (Comm) Incentive agreement Judge Neil Cadwallader of the Commercial Court, King’s Bench Division, within the High Court of England and Wales, held that the LCIA arbitrator’s decision was rightly issued on evidence showing the long-term incentive agreement (LTI) said to guarantee a bonus to claimant Zalina Kanametova was not binding because it had been ‘fraudulently backdated’. As a result, the LCIA arbitrator properly determined there was no jurisdiction over Kanametova’s claim for a USD 1.3 million bonus against the respondent, Cyprus-based OSG Records Management (Europe) Ltd. (referred to as OSG). Kanametova served as general director of OSG’s subsidiary, OSG Records Management Centre LLC (referred to as OSG Russia), from 2011–18. She contended that in 2015 she executed the LTI, which included an arbitration clause, and that it was also signed by Krzysztof...
In this issue: Key DR developments Claims and remedies Costs and funding Litigation Case management Scottish Dispute Resolution New content Dates for your diary Useful information Daily and weekly news alerts Key DR developments CPR updates 195th Practice Direction update expands digital claims process to non-monetary remedies: The Master of the Rolls and the Minister of State for Justice have approved the 195th Practice Direction update, extending the Damages Claim Portal under CPR PD 51ZB so that specified forms of non-monetary relief, described as ‘Other Remedy Claims’, can be filed online alongside a primary damages claim when both sides are represented. The reform also encompasses disputes concerning unfair relationships under the Consumer Credit Act 2006. By transferring matters previously dealt with on paper into a digital pathway, the change is designed to streamline case...
Deutsche Bank AG v Alexander Vik [2026] EWCA Civ 581 What was the background? In 2013, Deutsche Bank AG secured judgment against Sebastian Holdings Inc (SHI), a company controlled by Mr Alexander Vik, following major trading losses and unmet margin calls. SHI remained liable to the bank for more than US$360 million. In 2015, the Commercial Court, relying on CPR 71.2(1)(b), ordered Mr Vik-then an SHI director-to attend for examination and to provide information and documents concerning SHI’s assets and how the judgment debt might be met. He was personally served within the jurisdiction. Although he later resigned as director and left the jurisdiction, he did attend before Cooke J in December 2015. He was subsequently found to have lied repeatedly during that examination and to have deliberately withheld documents. Deutsche Bank then brought contempt proceedings under CPR 81, which resulted in findings of...
The Master of the Rolls and the Minister of State for Justice have approved the 195th Practice Direction (PD) Update, expanding the reach of the Damages Claim Portal (DCP) in CPR PD 51ZB so that specified non-monetary claims-termed ‘Other Remedy Claims’-can be lodged online alongside a principal damages claim, provided both sides have legal representation, rather than relying on paper filing. It further includes within scope disputes concerning unfair relationships under the Consumer Credit Act 2006, extending the update’s application. This reform shifts matters presently dealt with on paper into a digital workflow to enhance efficiency, aligning connected remedies with the same online route as the main damages claim. The amendments take effect on 27 May 2026. The additional category spans three remedies: injunctions, declarations and rescission. Sources: The 195th Practice Direction Update 195th UPDATE – PRACTICE DIRECTION...
Featured Dispute Resolution content
This Practice Note This Practice Note explores the principal procedural steps for bringing a statutory derivative claim under sections 260–264 of the Companies Act 2006 ( CA 2006), covering the permission application and the test the court will apply. It offers guidance on construing and applying the relevant CPR provisions. Depending on the court dealing with your matter, you should also be alert to any additional requirements—see Court-specific guidance below. Practitioners should note that, with effect from 6 April 2023, the CPR provisions concerning derivative claims were amended. In particular, CPR 19 was updated and CPR PD 19C was amended and re-designated as CPR PD 19A. These changes did not materially alter the substance of the approach to derivative claims, but the numbering of the pertinent provisions was changed. Judgments issued before 6 April 2023 may therefore refer to the previous provisions and...
How do I file documents at court? In court procedure, “filing” has a particular meaning. Under CPR 2.3(1), it is “delivering a document or information, by post or otherwise, to the court office”. The method you use can differ depending on the court dealing with the claim. You can file documents in several ways: In electronic form, including: using CE- File electronic working (under CPR PD 5C), which is mandatory in some courts-see: Electronic filing using CE- File by email-see: Electronic filing using email through an online claims service-where a claim starts or continues online, filing will usually be via that service. For details, see Practice Note: Online dispute resolution and the digital justice system- Online County Court services for money claims In...
Popular documents
When will the court allow an appeal against a finding of fact? The appeal court will permit an appeal only where the lower court’s decision was: wrong; or unjust due to a serious procedural or other irregularity in the lower court proceedings (CPR 52.21(3)). For more information, see Practice Note: Grounds for appealing and preliminary considerations. Where an appeal seeks to overturn a trial judge’s primary findings of fact, intervention is exceptional. An appellate court will not disturb a first instance judge’s factual conclusion simply because it would have reached a different view (Stocker v Stocker). The higher courts have repeatedly cautioned against interfering with a trial judge’s factual findings unless compelled to do so. That restraint extends not only to findings of primary fact, but also to the assessment of those facts and the inferences properly drawn from them, as confirmed by the Supreme Court in Re B (A Child) and by the Court of Appeal in FAGE v Chobani...
This Practice Note sets out guidance on putting forward fresh evidence when challenging a court’s decision under CPR 52. It explains when the appellate court may accept new material, how the Ladd v Marshall criteria apply when deciding whether to admit evidence on appeal, and the court’s discretion under CPR 52.21(2), including whether the material could have been secured for trial, whether it would have had a significant bearing, and its reliability. A note on CPR 52.21 and older cases The rules on admitting fresh evidence on appeal are found in CPR 52.21(1)–(2). Until October 2016, the equivalent provisions were in former CPR rule 52.11. Some judgments still cite the old rule, but the same principles apply to CPR 52.21 because the wording is identical. For further detail, see Practice Note: Amendments to Part 52 on 3 October 2016—table of destinations [Archived]. When will an appeal be allowed? The appeal court will permit an appeal only where the lower court’s decision was: wrong, or unjust owing to a serious procedural, or other, irregularity in the proceedings below (CPR 52.21(3)) ...
When evaluating a general damages claim, the practitioner ought initially to refer to the Judicial College Guidelines (JCG)...
This Practice Note This Practice Note reviews mechanisms used in settling litigation. A Tomlin order consists of a consent order paired with a schedule. It operates to stay proceedings on terms that have been agreed. The provisions contained in the schedule may remain confidential. This Practice Note describes the scope of confidentiality attaching to the schedule and sets out how it differs from a standard consent order. Sample wording for a Tomlin order is included, alongside links to precedents, as well as guidance on court approval. It also addresses varying, setting aside and enforcing a Tomlin order, including the considerations the court will take into account when handling applications for each. Further guidance is provided on interpreting and applying the relevant provisions of the CPR; however, some courts and divisions impose very specific requirements for both drafting and approval, and for approaching the schedule and confidentiality issues. Accordingly, you must consider the particular rules and court guide provisions in the forum where your claim is proceeding when drawing up the Tomlin order...
Discover more from LexisNexis
