Worldwide: Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration

Section 172(1) of the UK Companies Act 2006 requires directors to act in the way they consider, in good faith, would be most likely to promote the company’s success. But what standard of behaviour does this require?

A federal appeals court has reversed a lower court's dilution ruling in the decade-long trademark dispute between Jack Daniel's whiskey and VIP's "Bad Spaniels" parody dog toy. The Ninth Circuit held that Jack Daniel's failed to prove the humorous dog toy actually tarnished its famous brand, despite creating a mental association with the whiskey marks.

The Supreme Court's unanimous decision in Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, LLC has fundamentally altered the landscape for freight brokers facing negligent hiring claims. After years of conflicting court decisions on whether federal law shields brokers from state tort liability, the nation's highest court has definitively ruled that such claims fall within the FAAAA's safety exception and are not preempted.

A federal court has ruled that the State Department's blanket freeze on immigrant visa processing for 75 countries violates the Immigration and Nationality Act by stripping consular officers of their statutory discretion to conduct individualized public charge assessments.

The Supreme Court's unanimous decision in Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, LLC has fundamentally altered the landscape for freight brokers facing negligent hiring claims. After years of conflicting court decisions on whether federal law shields brokers from state tort liability, the nation's highest court has definitively ruled that such claims fall within the FAAAA's safety exception and are not preempted.

A California federal court allows CIPA wiretapping claims against Wayfair to proceed based on allegations that third-party tracking tools intercepted user communications before reaching the company's servers. The decision examines whether website tracking technology constitutes illegal interception under California's decades-old privacy statute and whether trap-and-trace device prohibitions apply to modern analytics tools.

Oregon's civil discovery rules diverge sharply from federal practice by eliminating interrogatories and generally prohibiting compelled pretrial disclosure of retained expert testimony. Understanding these procedural differences and adapting discovery strategy accordingly can mean the difference between building a winning record and discovering critical gaps too late to address them.

The Texas Business Court recently clarified who qualifies as an attorney when dealing with confidential and attorney's eyes only designations in discovery. In a case involving alleged trade secret misappropriation between rival transformer manufacturers, the court examined whether attorneys from India representing the plaintiff in other matters could access protected documents in the Texas state court case...

A federal court ruling examines what happens when a party inadvertently produces over 5,400 privileged documents to government investigators and attempts to claw them back. The decision hinges on whether reasonable steps were taken to prevent disclosure in the first place, with the court finding that flawed document review processes and inadequate quality control led to privilege waiver despite the inadvertent nature of the production.

In Local Marketing, Inc. v. Bennett, the Texas Business Court addressed a common dispute involving employees who depart a business to form a competing venture.

Florida is emerging as a favorable venue for defamation lawsuits because its long-arm statute makes it easier to bring out-of-state publishers into court—but plaintiffs still must clear the same substantive legal...

AI tools are already generating false, reputation-damaging statements about real people—but early defamation lawsuits against companies like OpenAI, Google and Meta are struggling because courts are applying...