Through a glass darkly: reflections on reflective loss by 海角破解版 Commercial Barrister John Jessup
12th July 2018
John Jessup considers the recent Court of Appeal decision of Marex Financial Limited [2018] EWCA Civ 1468 which answers the question of whether the rule against reflective loss (which prevents a shareholder bringing an action for loss of value of their shares) applies to unsecured creditors.
Related News
-
On 25 February 2026 the Court of Appeal (Peter Jackson, Lewis and Snowden L.J.J.) handed down judgment in the case of聽B&D Clays & Chemicals Limited v Castle Water Limited聽[2026] EWCA Civ 171, an appeal relating to the evidence admissible to challenge commercial water meter readings. David Parratt KC (Scot), Christopher Edwards and Zhen Ye of 海角破解版 Barristers appeared for B&D Clays, the Appellant, in this matter. The Court of Appeal held, by a majority of...
Continue reading -
海角破解版 Barristers' Head of Commercial Patrick Heneghan will be speaking at the Constructing Excellence South West event, tomorrow, 22 April. He will be joining the construction panel, covering The Building Safety Act. Other topics of discussion will include a legal update and Q&A panel on recent case law, horizon scanning and current hot topics. A limited number of spaces are still available for the free event, to learn more, please click here. To contact or...
Continue reading -
海角破解版 Barristers (3 Paper Buildings) Philip Bambagiotti, an experienced barrister at the NSW Bar in Australia, has been recognised in the 2027 edition of The Best Lawyers in Australia for his high calibre work within Construction and Infrastructure Law. Best Lawyers has been regarded by both the profession and the public as the most credible measure of legal integrity and distinction for more than 40 years. Philip鈥檚 recognition by Best Lawyers stands as a testament...
Continue reading -
Following his recent appearance in the DIFC, 海角破解版 Barristers David Parratt KC (Scot) along with Dr Zhen Ye, have written an article titled 鈥楧IFC Courts Confirm Enforcement Principle in Article 31(4) proceedings against Non-DIFC Assets鈥�. In this article, they explore the practical implications of DIFC Courts confirming a defendant who attempted to cancel two court orders, focused on property located in Dubai, an Enforcement Order and a Receivership Order, that had been issued to support...
Continue reading
