• Are Bitcoin Developers Fiduciaries? | Case by Case (Ep. 53)

    Are Bitcoin Developers Fiduciaries? | Case by Case (Ep. 53)

    Do bitcoin developers owe fiduciary duties to users?
    How does the law overlay and cope with a fast developing area of societal life? How should the law regulate the internet?
    These are questions for our time. And questions that will impact the future significantly.
    Absolutely fascinating seeing the English Court of Appeal grapple with these issues on case Tulip Trading Limited (A Seychelles Company) v Bitcoin Association For BSV & Ors [2023] EWCA Civ 83 (03 February 2023) – even if this is only Part 1 in the saga.
  • Liens and losses | Case by Case (Ep. 51)

    Liens and losses | Case by Case (Ep. 51)

    This time, Luke and Calum discuss English Commercial Court case Trafigura v TKK Shipping [2023] EWHC 26 (Comm)!
    The question is all about what “goods lost or damaged” means in the Article IV, rule 5(a) of the Hague-Visby Rules.
    Does ‘damage’ mean physical damage ONLY? Or does it include damage through the operation of a lien over the cargo – ie. financial type damage?
  • Eva-Maria Mayer & Philip Vagin Promoted to Senior Associate

    Eva-Maria Mayer & Philip Vagin Promoted to Senior Associate

    📢 Wonderful news announcement x2:

    We are proud to share that Eva-Maria Mayer and Philip Vagin have both been promoted to Senior Associate with our firm!

  • Calum Cheyne Promoted to Partner

    Calum Cheyne Promoted to Partner

    We are absolutely delighted to announce the upcoming promotion of Calum Cheyne to Partner with the firm, effective 1 January 2023.

  • Sugar Rush | Case by Case (Ep. 50)

    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)

    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.