header-logo header-logo

12 July 2018
Issue: 7801 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Weekly law digests

Contract

Minera Las Bambas SA and another v Glencore Queensland Ltd and others [2018] EWHC 1658 (Comm), [2018] All ER (D) 26 (Jul)

In a claim arising out of a tax indemnity in a share purchase agreement and a deed of warranty, the Commercial Court held, among other things, that, on the true construction of the agreements, the defendants (the sellers and guarantor) would only be liable to indemnify the claimant purchasers concerning tax assessments made by the Peruvian tax authority if and to the extent that the Peruvian tax court determined that the relevant tax claimed by the authority was payable, and such debt became coercively enforceable in accordance with the Tax Code.

Data protection

DB v General Medical Council [2018] EWCA Civ 1497, [2018] All ER (D) 21 (Jul)

There was no presumption under s 7(4) of the Data Protection Act 1988 in favour of a person who had not consented to or who had objected to disclosure pursuant to a subject access request in a mixed data case, as against a person

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Martin Livingston joins Ogier in Cayman to strengthen regulatory support

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan announces 47 summer promotions across UK offices

NEWS
Consultant-led law firms should prepare for closer regulatory attention as oversight evolves
Artificial intelligence may draft workplace grievances, but employers cannot treat them any differently from conventional complaints
From dishonest claimants to judicial promotions and procedural skirmishes, the latest legal developments offer plenty for litigators to digest
Fresh guidance is set to influence how courts decide whether hearings take place online or in person
County Court judges remain divided over whether landlords can lawfully force entry to carry out essential safety inspections after tenants ignore access injunctions
back-to-top-scroll