Determining the ‘Proximate Cause’ of Loss / Damage – Lessons from Allianz v University of Exeter [2023] EWHC 630 and Leyland Shipping v Norwich Union [1918] AC 350

The cover provided, or not provided, by all risks policies often turns on the proximate (or dominant) cause of the damage for which the cover is sought. That is because some causes of damage, such as faulty design or defective workmanship, may be excluded whereas other causes, such as poor operation or natural perils, may be covered. This gives rise to complex disputes as to which of a number of competing causes is the proximate cause of damage.

Anupam Mittal v Westbridge Ventures II [2023] SGCA 1 – One Step Forward or Two Steps Back?

As a dispute resolution hub, the Singapore Courts often considers arbitration-related issues. In Anupam Mittal v Westbridge Ventures II Investment Holdings [2023] SGCA 1 (“Anupam”), the Court of Appeal clarified that – pre-award stage – arbitrability of commercial disputes is determined by the proper law of the arbitration agreement and the law of the seat. Yet, deciding on the proper law may not be entirely straightforward. We share our insights below.

The Oscars. The Legal Guides and Directories. And Other Works of Fiction.

The annual film industry award ceremony, also known as the Oscars, is, with a nod to Will Smith, in full swing. And so is the back slapping and “humble bragging” that dominates LinkdIn and other social media platforms at this time of year as the legal directories publish their “rankings”. But is timing and commercially driven narcissism all they have in common? And should they both be nominated in the categories for best special effects, or make up?