Prima facie meaning

For trustees and managers of occupational pension schemes: Confirm that the scheme’s provisions, criteria and practices (PCPs) have been examined and reviewed to verify compliance with the non-discrimination rule. Where a PCP seems prima facie discriminatory and appears not to fit an exemption, raise with employer the question of whether an objective justification can be demonstrated. Understand how both courts and tribunals typically assess the objective justification defence in general. Do not treat generalisations or stereotyped assumptions as an adequate answer or satisfactory explanation...

Evidence of bad character Identify material relied on. Confirm it falls within CJA 2003 s98; if not, state its relevance. Set out the basis for admission: gateway(s) under ss101–106, reliance on conviction alone or its circumstances, key facts and proof. For unproven conduct or acquittals: outline facts, disputes, and why admission will not cause collateral litigation. Deal with each ground by the relevant gateway (ss102–106). Important explanatory evidence Under s101(1)(c): show that, without it, the tribunal would struggle to understand other evidence, and its value is substantial. Propensity to commit offences/be untruthful Under s101(1)(d): show convictions evidence propensity (same description/category), why that increases likelihood of guilt, and admission is fair. Consider number of convictions, behavioural tendency, similarities (eg modus operandi), gaps, and whether earlier untruthfulness arose (eg disbelieved accounts or false representations). Correct a false impression Under s101(1)(f): show a false impression per s105...

Before commencing the arbitration Check time bars; fit claims; plan measures; arbitrator number; nominations/disclosures; funding disclosure. Emergency measures Apply pre-constitution; before transmission; 15-day order; binding. Expedited Procedure Confirm scope/opt-outs; sole arbitrator; no Terms; streamlined; six-month award. Commencing the arbitration File Request with particulars; arbitration starts on receipt; pay fee. Responding to the arbitration Answer in 30 days; include counterclaims; answer counterclaims in 30 days. Jurisdiction Proceedings continue; raise pleas promptly; prima facie review. Preliminary meeting and directions Terms within 30 days; conference; timetable; efficient management. Written statements File per timetable. Evidence All appropriate means; documents-only unless hearing sought. The hearing Held if requested/ordered; in-person or remote; tribunal schedules; privacy. The...

Restructuring & Insolvency weekly highlights—29 August 2024 In this issue: Corporate insolvency processes Restructuring Personal insolvency Directors and insolvency Daily and weekly news alerts Corporate Rescue and Insolvency (August 2024 edition) New Q&A Corporate insolvency processes Company’s register of members | Conclusive or not for voting rights? (Bland v Keegan) In proceedings relating to JDK Construction Ltd (JDK), the Court of Appeal examined a challenge to the lawfulness of a written resolution appointing joint liquidators, alongside allegations of an unauthorised share transfer form. The Appellant argued her shares in JDK were wrongfully transferred, rendering the liquidators’ appointment invalid. The key question was whether the company’s register of members—recording her shares as transferred—was determinative for validating the members’ resolution. Affirming the decision of His Honour Judge Hodge KC, the Court of Appeal held that the register stands as prima facie evidence of who the members are and of the validity of resolutions passed by them, unless...

In this issue: International Arbitration Investment treaty arbitration Institutional and ad hoc arbitration Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Useful information International Arbitration Hong Kong—court orders stay of court proceedings in dispute involving non-signatory to arbitration agreement The Hong Kong Court of First Instance, in Techteryx Ltd v Legacy Trust Company Ltd, ordered a stay of Hong Kong proceedings in favour of arbitration at the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC). Her Ladyship, Madam Justice Mimmie Chan, found that the criteria for a stay under section 20 of the Arbitration Ordinance (Cap. 609) were fulfilled. On a prima facie assessment, there was a sufficient basis for the non-signatory defendant to invoke the arbitration agreements, relying on the doctrines of agency and equitable estoppel under Delaware law, which governed those agreements. For detailed commentary, refer to News Analysis: Hong Kong—court orders stay of court proceedings in dispute involving non-signatory to arbitration agreement (Techteryx Ltd v Legacy...

Soremi Investments Ltd v China National Gold Group HK Ltd & Another [2025] HKCFI 6417 What are the practical implications of this case? The leave ruling (and the earlier denial of a stay) serves as a reminder that a ‘one‑stop’ route to arbitration is not guaranteed, even if a clause adopts the familiar ‘arising out of or relating to’ wording and expressly captures non‑contractual duties. For deal lawyers preparing shareholder frameworks, the takeaway is to match the dispute‑resolution provision to the risk landscape. If the parties aim to arbitrate company‑level claims (asset misappropriation, breaches of directors’ duties, dishonest assistance or conspiracy), adding ‘tort‑inclusive’ wording will not suffice. The provision must be crafted (and the deal structured) so these disputes are properly characterised as arising from the relationship formed by the shareholders’ agreement (or otherwise linked to the company and its operations), and the actors must be bound (for example, via deeds of adherence for directors/affiliates, or by replicating arbitration clauses in the articles). For litigators, the decision refines the...

Legal professional privilege (LPP) safeguards the confidentiality of specified lawyer–client communications and is a fundamental right, subject only to tightly limited exceptions where it applies. A way to contest LPP is to argue that it never arose, often by invoking the crime–fraud, or iniquity, exception. This Practice Note explores that exception in greater depth. For guidance on what constitutes LPP and how it is preserved in criminal investigations, see the Practice Notes: Legal professional privilege in criminal proceedings and Maintaining privilege during criminal investigations. The crime-fraud exception When does it apply? Privilege cannot be claimed over communications made to facilitate the client’s commission of a crime or fraud, or that themselves form part of a fraudulent act. This is also referred to as the ‘iniquity exception’, a more precise term since, as stated in JSC BTA Bank v Abylasov, it is not limited to criminal conduct but extends to other forms of iniquity. See further below: ‘Iniquity’ as an exception to privilege...

Introduction This Practice Note provides guidance on arbitrations administered by the International and Ibero-American Arbitration Center of Madrid (‘CIIAM’ or the ‘Center’)—formerly CIAM-CIAR—under its Arbitration Rules effective from 1 January 2024. It reviews the main steps to commence and organise a CIIAM arbitration: from lodging the request and appointing arbitrators, to standards on independence, challenges, the possible designation of an arbitral secretary, and the provisions dealing with default and the continuation of the proceedings. Request for arbitration and answer CIIAM proceedings commence when the request for arbitration is filed with the Center, which may be submitted by email to solicitudes@ciiam.org. This filing opens the case file, sets out the essential particulars and, where appropriate, names the claimant’s co-arbitrator where a three-member tribunal is contemplated. The Arbitration Rules set out the minimum contents and the mandatory annexes. As a minimum, the request should include: identification and contact details of the parties and their representatives a brief outline of the dispute, the claims and, if...

Any mention of Articles in this Practice Note refers to the Articles of the Dubai International Arbitration Centre’s 2022 Arbitration Rules (DIAC, the DIAC Rules). The arbitration shall be governed by the DIAC Rules in force at the time DIAC arbitration proceedings commence, together with any subsequent amendments to those Rules, unless the parties have expressly chosen to apply the DIAC Rules in effect on the date the underlying arbitration agreement was concluded (Article 2.3). Prior to commencing an arbitration Before starting an arbitration under any institutional rules or on an ad hoc basis, reflect on the points below: does the arbitration clause you invoke encompass the whole of the dispute you intend to advance in these proceedings? have any pre-arbitration requirements been initiated, fully completed, and properly documented? are there any limitation matters and prima facie questions concerning contract law formation, interpretation and performance to assess in light of the applicable law(s)? is there likely to be a jurisdictional challenge?...