- Financial services (6)
- Litigation / Dispute Resolution (6)
- Company/Commercial (3)
- Crime (3)
- Professional Indemnity/Negligence (3)
- Corporate (2)
- Funds (2)
- Insurance/reinsurance (2)
- Real Estate (2)
- Agriculture (1)
- Competition/EU (1)
- Construction (1)
- Employment (1)
- Family (1)
- Information Technology (1)
- Insolvency & restructuring (1)
- Intellectual Property (1)
- Media/Entertainment/Sport (1)
- Personal tax / Trusts (1)
- Regulatory and compliance (1)
- Tax (1)
Sort By: Newest first | Oldest first
No5 Chambers’ Paul Marshall, a member of No5 Chambers’ commercial group, is to speak in Frankfurt about the mis-selling of financial instruments.
Proprietary estoppel prevents the legal owner of property from asserting their strict legal rights in respect of that property when it would be inequitable to allow him to do so.
This article is designed to provide a practitioner’s guide to the principal types of enforcement mechanisms available for financial remedy orders.
No5 Chambers’ Richard Gibbs has defended a woman from Coventry who has been jailed from tricking pensioners into handing over their bank cards in a scam.
Mugni Islam-Choudhury reports on the latest developments on restrictive covenants following Merlin Financial Consultants Ltd v Cooper and Prophet plc v Huggett.
The banks’ independent reviewers are now considering consequential loss claims. The FCA expects that process to be concluded by the end of 2014.
Routes to financial redress against banks, investment advisers, insurers, mortgage advisers and product providers
Susanne Muth discusses some pertinent and recurring themes encountered in the commercial and chancery area of practice.
No5 Chambers barrister Phil Bradley has defended Michaela Hutchings, 23, of Staffordshire, who retained a wrongly credited bank transfer.
Ian Bridge of No5 has defended a business man who found himself facing eight separate allegations of fraud on his company, which at the time was indebted to the Natwest Bank.
No5 Chambers has released the first edition of its Commercial & Chancery Bulletin for 2014.
One of the difficulties encountered when advising clients who claim that they have been mis-sold an interest rate hedging product is the paucity of decided case law concerning the sale of such products.