Essar v Norscot – a landmark judgement

Transport | 01 February 2017

The High Court judgment in Essar Oilfields Services Ltd v Norscot Rig Management Pvt Ltd [2016] was brought down by His Honour Judge Waksman QC (sitting as a deputy High Court judge). The report of its delivery on 15 September 2016 had already sparked great interest in the world of litigation finance and for good reason. But its implications go well beyond that as we show. [Continue Reading]

Dividends and directors’ duties – case update

Transport | 01 February 2017

A recent case in the High Court provides a helpful analysis as to the scope of directors’ duties in situations where dividend payments are vulnerable to challenge. It proves a cautionary tale to directors who are considering the payment of intergroup dividends and illustrates how the legal issues surrounding this area are complex and need careful navigation by directors and their advisers. [Continue Reading]

A tricky course – the delicate business of using FIDIC contracts in offshore projects

Transport | 01 February 2017

The ‘marine renewables’ sector is increasingly of interest to contractors. There are a number of reasons for this. For some, fewer opportunities exist within the oil and gas sector. Other see the increased number of offshore wind projects as an opportunity. In both instances, it is clear that the growth in marine renewables projects will continue to make this an area of interest for those companies who own and operate offshore installation and service vessels. [Continue Reading]

Changes to the Immigration Rules – November 2016

Immigration | 24 January 2017

In March 2016, the Home Office announced that there would be two phases of changes to the Tier 2 sponsorship regime following a review of the category published by the Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) on 24 March 2016. The first of the phases had been due in autumn 2016. On 3 November 2016, the Home Office finally published its Statement of Changes. Together with the expected changes to the Tier 2 category, a number of other significant changes to the Immigration Rules were also announced and came into effect on 24 November 2016. [Continue Reading]

Merger Review on Both Sides of the Atlantic: a comparison

International Comparative Guides | 01 December 2016

Although there are over 75 countries in the world with merger control regimes that, for the most part, apply to foreign-to-foreign transactions, the US and EU remain the key jurisdictions when assessing global mergers.  This is the case once a transaction is announced and notified, but maybe even more so when legal teams of companies are assessing the chances of successfully implementing a planned transaction.

The reason is that other competition authorities look towards Brussels and Washington.  Unless there are local specifications, it is unlikely that a country would stop a global deal if both the US and EU have approved it.  When assessing the risk of a transaction, the first question will inevitably be: can we get it through in the US and the EU?  In the not too distant future that question may also include China but, for the most part, the Chinese review remains more a question of effects on the deal timetable, not whether the deal is viable.  While the US and EU reviews are very similar, there are a number of key differences that we have sought to highlight below. [Continue Reading]

Merger control in the European Union: an overview

International Comparative Guides | 01 December 2016

All in-house counsel will be aware of the merger control rules that grant competition authorities the power to monitor, assess and even modify or prohibit M&A activity.  There are very few jurisdictions around the world that do not enforce some form of merger control and, with the notable exception of Luxembourg, all 28 EU Member States can require the notification of mergers.  This requirement can be triggered by sales into a Member State, irrespective of where a business is registered or based.  As such, being familiar with the merger control rules is important not only for companies that are located in the EU, but for all companies that conduct business in the region. [Continue Reading]

US immigration reform in the wake of the 2016 presidential election

Immigration | 18 November 2016

‘Our future will always be written in part by immigrants’ Hillary Clinton

Immigration was a prominent and highly charged topic of the 2016 presidential election. Hillary Clinton acknowledged that the US immigration system was broken and had promised to pass comprehensive reforms to strengthen the economy and to offer a path to full and equal citizenship to families that have been separated under the current legislation.  She promised to uphold President Obama’s executive actions, including DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) and DAPA (Deferred Action for Parents of Americans) that would grant relief from the threat of deportation to thousands of long-term residents in the US, mainly from Latin America. [Continue Reading]

Mergers & Acquisitions (M&A) – Comparative Guide Introduction

International Comparative Guides | 11 November 2016

Following the record levels of activity seen in 2015, global M&A in 2016 was always going to have a hard act to follow. So far in 2016, while global markets have remained reasonably active, they have been more subdued across all the major geographic regions and market sectors than was the case in the previous year.
[Continue Reading]

International Arbitration – Comparative Guide Introduction

International Comparative Guides | 04 November 2016

The aim of this guide is to provide its readers with a pragmatic overview of the law and practice of international arbitration across a variety of jurisdictions. The level of uniformity in this area is a topic in itself as international arbitration continues to straddle the well-ingrained legal cultures of the globe.

Each chapter of this guide provides information about the current issues affecting international arbitration in a particular country and addresses topics such as the legal requirements of a valid arbitration agreement, the authority and obligations of arbitrators, the governing law and procedure, preliminary and interim relief, the rules of evidence and the enforcement of arbitral awards. [Continue Reading]