Mishcon de Reya page structure
Site header
Menu
Main content section

Inside Disputes

Issue 2: October 2025

Inside Disputes

Editor's note

Hugo Plowman
Hugo Plowman

I'm pleased to introduce this latest edition of Inside Disputes, bringing together insights and analysis from across our award-winning Disputes team at Mishcon de Reya. 

As underscored in MV2030, our recently announced strategic 5-year plan, disputes work is in our DNA and will remain an area for investment in the future. This edition once again demonstrates the breadth of our expertise. Topics range from the cutting-edge digital challenges posed to organisations by deepfake fraud to fundamental commercial law principles, including implied terms, as well as practical guidance on navigating HMRC disputes.   

Coverage of key Supreme Court and Privy Council decisions also features prominently. Highlights include Bilta (UK) Ltd v Tradition, providing essential guidance on limitation and liability; URS v BDW, sharpening the rules on consultant liability; the abolition of the shareholder rule in Jardine v Oasis Investments; and insights on the balance to be struck between human rights and sanctions rules in Shvidler v Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs

As the new court term progresses, we are looking forward to continuing our busy programme of events, from our Disputes Essentials breakfast seminars, through to our Nightmare Scenario flash digital sessions. If you aren't already signed up to receive notifications, please subscribe to our mailing list.  

News
corporate building

Shattering the illusion of the shareholder rule: Privy Council confirms that companies can assert legal professional privilege against their shareholders

The context to Jardine Strategic Limited v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd & Ors No 2 [2025] UKPC 34 was the amalgamation of two companies within the Jardine Matheson group - a multinational conglomerate incorporated in Bermuda. Under the applicable Bermudan statute, shareholders who dissented to the amalgamation were to be paid a fair value for their shares.

News
abstract orange lines

A juicy agreement: The implication of pricing terms in commercial contracts

The Court of Appeal's recent decision in KSY Juice Blends Ltd v Citrosuco GmbH is a helpful and important reminder of the English courts' power to uphold commercial contracts where it is satisfied the parties intended their bargain should be enforceable. In concluding that a reasonable price should be implied into a long term contract, the decision will also be encouraging for parties operating in volatile markets where flexible pricing mechanisms are critical.

News
white lights on dark background

Liability & Limitation in the Supreme Court - Bilta (UK) Ltd (in liquidation) v Tradition Financial Services Ltd

The recent Supreme Court decision in Bilta (UK) Ltd (in liquidation) and others v Tradition Financial Services Ltd [2025] UKSC 18 marks a significant moment in the interpretation of fraudulent trading under section 213 of the Insolvency Act 1986. The judgment expands the scope of section 213, affirming that liability for fraudulent trading is not confined to those in managerial roles within the insolvent company. Instead, it can extend to any party knowingly participating in the company's fraudulent business.

News
abstract red lights

The Insurance Act 2015: 10 years on, what have we learned?

In 2015, significant changes were made to the landscape of the United Kingdom’s insurance law for businesses when the Insurance Act 2015 (IA) received royal assent. Until then, insurance law had been governed by the Marine Insurance Act 1906, an act that codified principles developed in the 18th and 19th centuries.

Subscribe

Never miss a publication by signing up to our mailing list

Inside Disputes Issues

How can we help you?
Help

How can we help you?

Subscribe: I'd like to keep in touch

If your enquiry is urgent please call +44 20 3321 7000

I'm a client

I'm looking for advice

Something else