Legal News

Counsel for the insurance giant told the High Court that Endurance Worldwide Insurance Ltd — trading as Sompo International and part of Japanese insurer Sompo Holdings Inc — is liable for damages arising from various breaches by the defunct firms. Ben Elkington KC of 4 New Square Chambers argued that a substantial excess in the professional indemnity policies would ordinarily shield Sompo from low-value claims, but that does not apply where the insured has become insolvent. Am Trust has settled with Novitas Loans Ltd for £48.5m after the legal loans provider sued the insurer over a legal funding arrangement with Pure Legal Ltd and High Street Solicitors Ltd, both now in administration. According to court documents, participants in the scheme also took out after-the-event policies with Am Trust, while Novitas entered into a deed of indemnity with the insurer....

In this issue: Key PI and clinical negligence developments Road traffic accidents Costs Clinical negligence Fundamental dishonesty Expert evidence Accidents abroad Public authorities and the state Issues with service Other PI and clinical negligence news Lex Talk®PI & Clinical Negligence: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts Lexis Nexis® Webinars Useful information Key PI and clinical negligence developments CILEX wins permission to challenge Mazur ruling Law360: The Chartered Institute of Legal Executives ( CILEX) has secured leave to appeal the Mazur decision, which held that legal executives and other unauthorised law firm personnel were barred from conducting litigation, even under a solicitor’s supervision. See News Analysis: Cilex wins permission to challenge Mazur ruling. Road traffic accidents King’s Bench Division dismisses appeal against an award for damages In Motor Insurers Bureau v Houston [2025] EWHC 3178 ( KB), the...

Perrin v Walsh [2025] EWHC 2536 ( KB) What are the practical implications of this case? Where there is proof of egregious behaviour by operatives, the court may decide to exclude evidence that would otherwise be admissible and probative. Defendants intending to rely on covert surveillance must take particular care to ensure that: all — meaning every last piece — of the surveillance material is disclosed any edited compilation still contains all footage that is relevant where the operative possesses relevant, unique knowledge, they provide commentary to supply proper context to what the footage shows witness evidence is served that accurately sets out the circumstances of all surveillance, explains how or why any gaps arose, and describes the systems used to secure fair capture and appropriate backup Care should be taken to avoid an expert referring to another expert’s earlier draft...

Costs of unsuccessful claimant ordered against defendants for failed allegation of fundamental dishonesty ( Hakmi v East & North Hertfordshire NHS Trust & another) Hakmi v East & North Hertfordshire NHS Trust & another [2025] EWHC 2597 ( KB) What are the practical implications of this case? Defendants and those acting for them should pause before pleading and persisting with a charge of fundamental dishonesty. This ruling underlines that the appropriate costs order turns not solely on the result of the litigation, but equally on the route taken to get there. Bolting on a weak allegation of fundamental dishonesty is to be shunned; otherwise defendants may find themselves liable for uplifted costs where the claimant prevails, and, exposed to adverse costs even where the claimant does not succeed. What was the background? The proceedings stem from an alleged omission to administer thrombolysis for a stroke, which the...

CILEX announced on 25 November 2025 that the Court of Appeal has granted it leave to seek to reverse the judgment, which held that its 18,000 members and other legal practitioners were unable to conduct litigation at all while supervised by others. The September High Court ruling ran contrary to what many across the profession had believed. According to CILEX, the Court of Appeal stated that the case ‘raises an important point of practice, and its significance to the legal profession as a whole is a compelling reason for an appeal to be heard’. Jennifer Coupland, CILEX’s Chief Executive, described the appellate court’s decision to allow the appeal to proceed as ‘great news’. The......

The Court of Appeal held that the four children of Fahad Al- Rajaan, the former director of the Public Institution For Social Security ( PIFSS), were properly added as parties so that the authority can attempt to reclaim proceeds said to derive from the alleged scheme from Al- Rajaan’s heirs if it ultimately succeeds in its case. Delivering the written judgment of a three-judge panel, Justice Richard Arnold said the High Court was right to conclude that PIFSS had a good arguable case that the children would be necessary and proper parties to any enforcement action. He said: ‘ Since it would be appropriate to join the Al- Rajaan children as defendants were they present within the jurisdiction, in order for the question of Mr Al- Rajaan’s liability to be determined as between PIFSS and the Al- Rajaan children, it follows that they are...

Note: the CPRC has stopped sharing the background papers alongside the minutes, so no explanatory documents accompany this News Analysis to set out the matters discussed. A copy of the minutes appears here now: Minutes of CPRC meeting 3 October 2025. Welcome, apologies and introductory remarks (item 1) The Chair greeted members at the opening meeting of the legal year. Minutes from the 4 July 2025 meeting (see News Analysis: Minutes of the CPR Committee meeting—4 July 2025) were approved, and the action log was recorded as noted. Part 82—closed material procedure (item 2) Mo J officials outlined the subsequent tranche of reforms from Sir Duncan Ouseley’s 2022 CMP report findings. The Committee approved a revised new rule 82.26A, to be renamed ‘ Special Advocate Position Statement’ and reframed by reference to CPR 5.4B and 5.4C provisions. Subject to minor drafting tweaks, the rule will feature in the...

Igors Veliks, formerly at Playtech, and his current employer, Realtime Latvia, persuaded the appeal court that the betting company lacks any entitlement to sue them in England. The judges held that any harm arising from the supposed commercial deception occurred beyond the UK, and they set aside a High Court ruling that had favoured Playtech. The court concluded that most of the loss said to stem from Veliks’ alleged misuse of trade secrets took place in Latvia, where Playtech is headquartered. As a result, assessment of damage falls to the Latvian courts, not to the English courts. Playtech maintained it had suffered a downturn in UK licensing income because of the alleged misappropriation of trade secrets, but the appeal court rejected that contention. The court noted: “ This pleading is concerned only with the indirect consequences for Playtech of the...

A copy of the minutes can be accessed here: OPRC Minutes for meeting on 20 October 2025. Welcome, apologies and introductory remarks (item 1) The Master of the Rolls ( MR) welcomed members and attendees to the Committee’s first open meeting. He made particular note of the new Senior President of Tribunals ( SPT), Sir James Dingemans, attending his first meeting in post. The MR invited nominations to a working group on unified contempt of court rules, stressing cross-jurisdictional experience. The minutes of the meeting on 14 July 2025 were approved (see News Analysis: Minutes of the OPR Committee meeting—14 July 2025). Consultation responses and priorities (item 2) The Committee reviewed the outcome of its summer consultation, which sought views on two principal proposals: the Digital Inclusion Framework and the Pre- Action Model ( PAM) grounded in Part 2 of the Judicial Review and Courts Act 2022......

On 21 November 2025, CILEx Regulation—the watchdog for members of the Chartered Institute of Legal Executives—stated that the applications were made after the Legal Services Board approved its ability to authorise litigation rights, in response to the Mazur judgment issued by the High Court in September. The organisation, which oversees about 18,000 legal professionals, said it has increased its capacity to process the applications amid worries that some executives could face losing their jobs. ‘ We have......

On 18 November, European Commissioner for Justice Michael Mc Grath said he had heard industry feedback and concluded the EU need not impose rules on third‑party funding. Instead, Europe would centre efforts on implementing EU legislation that brings in a pathway for consumer class actions throughout the bloc, rather than drafting further regulatory measures at present. He explained that, based on that input, the Commission would give priority to overseeing how the Representative Actions Directive is applied in consumer collective redress, speaking at the closing session of the EU’s high‑level forum on justice for growth. On 20 November 2025, Paul Kong, executive director of the International Legal Finance Association ( ILFA), welcomed Mc Grath’s unequivocal indication that regulation of third‑party litigation finance at EU level is not envisaged. He added that this seemed to shut down any discussion about fresh rules, which, in his view,...

High Court Judge Robert Jay ruled that the Brazilian 'had a real prospect' of proving at trial that Formula One, its former chief executive Bernie Ecclestone and the sport's governing body, FIA, conspired to cover up events surrounding a deliberate crash during a race in Singapore. Massa firmly contends he should be recognised as the legitimate 2008 world champion, having been edged by Lewis Hamilton by a solitary point. Nelson Piquet Jr. intentionally crashed in Singapore on orders from Renault. According to Massa, the repercussions of that crash ultimately deprived him of the crown. He argues the Singapore Grand Prix result ought to have been formally voided. His claim is anchored in a 2023 interview Ecclestone granted to the F1 Insider website. In it, the ex- F1 boss admitted that he and Max Mosley, then FIA president, were aware the incident was...

The representative body for around 18,000 legal practitioners said it is turning to the Court of Appeal's discretion to allow an appeal to be pursued by an individual affected by the decision, despite the fact the organisation was not involved in the original case. ‘ We consider that the questions, ambiguities and practical consequences arising from the ruling must be thoroughly explored via this appeal,’ said the CILEX chief executive, Jennifer Coupland. In September, Judge Clive Sheldon determined in the High Court that non-qualified staff working within law firms are prohibited from conducting litigation, even where they act under the oversight of a qualified solicitor......

In this issue: Key PI and Clinical negligence developments Coroner's inquests Cross-border service—principles Scottish claims Lexis Nexis® PI & Clinical Negligence Quantum Database Lexis Nexis® Quantum Portal Lex Talk®PI & Clinical Negligence: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts Lexis Nexis® Webinars Useful information Key PI and Clinical negligence developments Claims Portal issues simplified user guide to strengthen information security Claims Portal Ltd has published a Simplified User Guide to support organisations and users in navigating the Claims Portal safely and effectively. Intended as a concise point of reference, it prioritises information security, the safeguarding of organisational and client data, and adherence to the current User Agreement. Claims Portal has requested that this guide is distributed to all Portal users within each organisation to foster consistent and secure use of the platform. See: LNB News...

Salinas retained the strategy consultancy B. C. Strategy UK Ltd—known as Black Cube—to conduct an ‘unethical’ undercover operation to secure an edge in the litigation against his adversary, Vladimir Sklarov, as recorded in a High Court judgment formally delivered on 13 November 2025. Judge Stephen Houseman described such conduct as ‘anathema to the fundamental basis or premise of civil proceedings’. The judge added that Salinas misused the court’s process by relying on the unlawfully obtained material to seek summary judgment in his favour. Despite those conclusions, the court declined to strike out the fraud claim, instead granting permission to appeal. The judgment explains that Salinas’ ‘abnormal and abusive’ behaviour must be assessed against the ‘distinct policy in favour of exposing and remedying serious wrongdoing such as fraud’. According to the judgment, Sklarov’s former litigation solicitor, identified only as ‘ X’, was tricked into...

Standish v Hill [2025] EWHC 2954 ( Ch) What was the background? Mr Hill entered bankruptcy on 24 July 2018. The Trustees contended that a chain of dealings had diverted the value of assets away from Mr Hill to a series of entities and vehicles, and that those transfers are amenable to challenge under section 423 of the Insolvency Act 1986. They also alleged that three trusts established by Mr Hill, or for him, were all shams. The claim form was filed on 23 July 2024, right at the very close of the six‑year limitation window. On 2 January 2025, the Trustees made a without‑notice application seeking the court’s permission to serve out of the jurisdiction and a further extension of time for serving the claim form. On 8 January 2025, Deputy Master Linwood granted permission to serve out and also extended the period for...

PI & Clinical Negligence weekly highlights—13 November 2025 In this issue we cover key PI and clinical negligence updates, including issues with service, case management, proving negligence or breach of statutory duty, road traffic accidents, product liability, coroner’s inquests, and other PI and clinical negligence news. Key PI and Clinical negligence developments Following Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys [2025] EWHC 2341, the Law Society has released detailed guidance to address the uncertainty created by the High Court judgment on litigation conduct. The practice note clarifies who is authorised to practise litigation under the Legal Services Act 2007 and sets out the boundary between conducting litigation and supporting an authorised person (see: LNB News 11/11/2025 20). Issues with service In Bali v 1-2 Couriers Ltd [2025] EWCA Civ 1413, the Court of Appeal confirmed that a claim form is issued when sealed, and it upheld the refusal of an...

High Court judge William Trower has held that Igor Kolomoisky and Gennadiy Bogolyubov are jointly and severally liable to pay JSC Commercial Bank Privat Bank over US$1.76bn in damages together with US$1.19bn in compound interest, after he found in July that the two were responsible for the fraud. The figure corresponds to the US$1.9bn siphoned from Ukraine’s biggest bank, less the value of assets already restored to Privat Bank. Judge Trower explained that, under Ukrainian law, the interest is warranted to properly compensate Privat Bank for being deprived of the use of the misappropriated funds over time. Kolomoisky and Bogolyubov must also pay a further £76.4m as an interim costs payment. He determined that costs should be awarded on the indemnity basis because the pair persisted throughout the proceedings in asserting they were not to blame for the fraud. He concluded that this...

Nefelia Shipping SA v Mosaic Fertilizantes Do Brazil [2025] EWHC 2941 ( Comm). What was the background? The claimants commenced proceedings against Brazilian cargo interests and their underwriters, seeking general average contributions under bonds and guarantees executed in March 2018. The dispute stemmed from the M/ V ' KONA TRADER' running aground at Paranagua after a main engine breakdown in March 2018; the general average adjusters assessed the defendants’ share at US$892,381.46 plus interest. Both defendants had expressly chosen English law and the exclusive jurisdiction of the High Court of Justice in London. The claim form was issued on 11 September 2023, and the claimants sought a 15‑month period for service, anticipating difficulties in serving the Brazilian parties. That initial extension was granted on 22 September 2023, carrying validity through to 15 November 2024. Nonetheless, compliant papers reached the FPS only on 4 October 2024, so a...

What was the background? The claimant, Field Industrial Supplies WLL, a Qatari supplier of industrial utility products, hired the defendant, Fredy Thomas, in 2006, as an employee. The defendant, a first cousin of Mr Francis, relocated to Doha that year and, by 2013, handled a substantial part of the company’s financial administration. He left the claimant’s employ in 2016, saying he intended to emigrate to New Zealand; instead he went to India and later the UK, where he ultimately acquired British citizenship. Concerns arising in mid-2019 about a colleague, Mr Nadarajan, prompted internal enquiries by the claimant that concluded both he and the defendant had engaged in cheque fraud. On 28 February 2021, Doha's Public Prosecutor's Office commenced proceedings against both individuals in the Court of First Instance. At a preliminary hearing on 29 April 2021, a...