• Sugar Rush | Case by Case (Ep. 50)

    Episode 50! What an exciting milestone. We hope you, our valued listeners, enjoy this third case in our trilogy of lookback cases. We’ve been analysing a few old cases to coincide with Luke’s launch of the inaugural International Commodities and Shipping Law at UoW.
    This week looks back at Compagnie Commerciale Sucres et Denrees v C Czarnikow Ltd [1990] UKHL J1011-2.
  • Condition, innominate or will-o’-the wisp? | Case by Case (Ep. 49)

    In this second of their trilogy of ‘look-back’ cases, Luke and Calum explore the salient case of Bunge Corporation (New York) v Tradax Export SA (Panama) [1981] APP.L.R. 02/25.
    Ever wondered why time-based delivery clauses in a commodities sale and purchase contract are (typically) considered to be conditions?
    Ever wondered what is an innominate term?
    Ever wondered how to tell the difference between a condition and an innominate term?
    Ever wondered what is a ‘will-o’-the-wisp’?
    Listen in for answers and check out our ⁠YouTube channel.
  • Mash’s Potatoes | Case by Case (Ep. 48)

    As Luke prepares to launch the International Shipping and Commodities intensive law course at the University of Wollongong in a couple of weeks, he’s had cause to look back at some leading cases.
    Back to the 1960s. The Beatles, Civil Rights activism, flares, and… Mash & Murrell Ltd. v Joseph I. Emmanuel, Ltd. [1961].
    Some law doesn’t stand the test of time (much like poorly ventilated potatoes crossing an ocean). Some law does, as we discuss in this pod. For more, check out our ⁠YouTube channel.
  • Scottish IndyRef2 – The Supreme Court Decision Explained | Case by Case (Ep. 47)

    This is a big case.  Scottish Independence Referendum 2 – the sequel?
    As you will have seen from the news, the UK Supreme Court handed down its decision yesterday.
    No vote allowed by Scotland without UK parliament consent. That’s the headline. But what was the actual legal case about?

  • Guess Who? | Case by Case (Ep. 46)

    In this episode, Luke Zadkovich and Calum Cheyne discuss the English Court of Appeal case Loreley Financing (Jersey) No 30 Ltd v Credit Suisse Securities (Europe) Ltd & Ors [2022] EWCA Civ 1484 (10 November 2022). An issue on privilege decided for the first time in centuries…
    Is the identity of individuals providing instructions for a client inherently privileged ?
    Is there a Canadian style “zone of privacy” in English law privilege?
    Don’t forget the proportionality test in RFI requests!
    The Lord Justice Males Fan Club rollicks on. Listen in to discover this surprising case. For more, check out our ⁠YouTube channel.
  • Be careful what you word for | Case by Case (Ep. 45)

    This week Luke and Calum discuss demurrage claims and time bars in a recent SMA case Stolt Tankers BV v. Stryker Fuels LLC (MT “MONAX”) – SMA No. 4449, 4 August 2022.
    How many times are we going to say that the specific words chosen in a contractual clause are important?!