Through a glass darkly: reflections on reflective loss by 3PB 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
-
3PB's property, housing and agricultural specialist Oliver Nunn has successfully obtained a £174,000 freezing injunction in a high-value equine law dispute. Frequently instructed in disputes over horses, after sales, loans and veterinary treatments, Oliver was instructed by specialist equine solicitor Rebecca Stojak who is the Head of the Equine Law Team at Geldards LLP. Oliver represented an aspiring dressage rider who entered into an agreement to lease a horse at the rate of £30,000 per...
Continue reading -
Rebecca Farrell, specialist commercial and insolvency barrister at 3PB Barristers (3 Paper Buildings), has written an article exploring three recent Insolvency Appeals and their potential impact. In her article, Rebecca addresses the Supreme Court decision in El Husseiny v Invest Bank PSC [2025] UKSC 4 which was handed down last week. This Appeal concerned the interpretation of Section 423 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (“the Insolvency Act”). In its analysis the Supreme Court supported a...
Continue reading -
3PB’s commercial and property barrister Alex Whatley will be speaking at the Civil Litigation Conference on the Thursday 27th March for the Bournemouth Law Society. The conference is taking place at The Carlton Hotel in Bournemouth. To book your ticket for this event, please click here. The cost is £100 for members and £150 for non-members. Alex Whatley is recommended in both Chambers and Partners UK and Legal 500 as a top commercial litigation barrister....
Continue reading -
3PB Barristers’ (3 Paper Buildings) specialist commercial, chancery and property barrister Alexander Whatley has written for LexisNexis on the case of R v Revenue and Customs Commissioners, which was brought to the Supreme Court to determine the correct characterisation of a contract. In his article, entitled “Amendments in retrospect – Repair or replace? (R v Revenue and Customs Commissioners)”, Alexander explores the legal distinctions between amendment, rescission and replacement, the relevant contextual considerations for the courts and...
Continue reading
