Jump to Main ContentJump to Primary Navigation

It's a blame game

    By now we are all used to hearing news of falling house prices, rising unemployment, and deepening recession. And although there have also been recent predictions of economic green shoots, many businesses have suffered as a result of the credit crunch.

    But there are some industries that have profited from the market events of the past couple of years. Insolvency practitioners, low-end supermarkets and litigation lawyers are all examples of these.

    During my legal career, there has never been a busier time for litigators. Lawyers specialising in real estate, corporate and finance law - in such high demand during the M&A boom - have been faced with the prospects of pay cuts and redundancy.

    But departments that are counter-cyclical in nature are sought after in times of recession.

    During the good times, businesses are happy to overlook minor disputes. But now no-one can afford not to pursue a debt or enforce a claim.

    People are looking for someone to blame; disgruntled ex-employees are seeking a payout; regulation is in the spotlight and regulators are trying to prove their worth by carrying out more investigations and imposing higher penalties on regulated businesses.

    Perhaps the most interesting development is the so-called "credit crunch litigation" which has emerged.

    As well as lawsuits relating to deals that went wrong, this type of litigation concerns investors suing banks, hedge funds and other financial institutions for mis-selling, misrepresentation or negligence in connection with products that have gone belly-up and led to a loss. In order to succeed in court, investors must show that their losses were foreseeable, which may be a tough job in the context of such unprecedented market events.

    So far, the judgments have tended to favour the defendant banks.

    The courts have sought to prevent investors from claiming they did not understand the product or service they were signing up to when the contract they signed contained wording stating precisely that they did understand (or would seek independent assistance in order to understand it).

    In this way, investors have not been allowed to muddle poor performance with mis-selling.

    But the court decisions to date have dealt with situations in which the investors were considered by the court to be sophisticated parties (such as companies with experience of investing in complicated financial products). The courts are likely to be reluctant to apply the same principles to claims brought by high-street customers. It remains to be seen how this new and unique phenomenon will develop.

Expert View

‘Time to change’ our approach to pensions

Ros Altmann

Monday, December 16, 2013

‘Time to change’ our approach to pensions
Expert View

Israeli water tech: A valuable resource

Noah Shani

Friday, September 13, 2013

Israeli water tech: A valuable resource
Expert View

Employers must act now over pensions

Ros Altmann

Thursday, April 25, 2013

Employers must act now over pensions
Expert View

New look for retailers’ survival

Stephen Spitz

Monday, November 4, 2013

New look for retailers’ survival
Expert View

We must help our youth source jobs

Zaki Cooper

Thursday, July 25, 2013

We must help our youth source jobs
Expert View

New jobs laws ahead

Jonathan Cantor

Thursday, February 14, 2013

New jobs laws ahead
Expert View

Industrial manufacturing roots resurface in Bri...

Zaki Cooper

Thursday, October 17, 2013

Industrial manufacturing roots resurface in Bri...
Expert View

Social media could affect your firm

Anonymous

Monday, July 1, 2013

Social media could affect your firm
Expert View

Why Cash is not King

Anonymous

Thursday, February 7, 2013

Why Cash is not King