Judicial Committee of the Privy Council

Upcoming

• The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council

  Hearing

  18 June 2025

  Credit Suisse Life (Bermuda) Ltd (Respondent) v Bidzina Ivanishvili and 6 others (Appellants) No 2 (Bermuda)

  Lord Hodge,

  Lord Briggs,

  Lord Leggatt,

  Lord Richards,

  Lady Simler

  The Cross-Appeal is advanced on four grounds. In summary, the Cross-Appellants contend that the misrepresentation claim should be governed by Bermuda law, with the result that the 3-year Georgian law limitation period should not apply, because either: (i) the Imanagement exception to the double actionability rule applies (Ground 1); or (ii) if Georgian law is to be taken into account pursuant to the double actionability rule, that should include Georgia’s choice of law rules which the Cross-Appellants contend refer actionability back to Bermudian law (Ground 2). The Cross-Appellants also contend that the misrepresentation claim was based on the same or substantially the same facts so that it was appropriate for the Chief Justice to give leave to amend the original Statement of Claim (and so defeat any Georgian law limitation defence) (Ground 3). Finally, the Cross-Appellants contend that this is an appropriate case for finding that the Cross-Appellants were induced by the fraudulent misrepresentations, notwithstanding that they may not have contemporaneously and consciously turned their minds to the specific misrepresentations that were conveyed (Ground 4).

  Linked cases

  JCPC/2024/0022 Credit Suisse Life (Bermuda) Ltd (Appellant) v Bidzina Ivanishvili and 6 others (Respondents) (Bermuda)

  Cross-appeal

  ---

• The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council

  Hearing

  18 June 2025

  Credit Suisse Life (Bermuda) Ltd (Appellant) v Bidzina Ivanishvili and 6 others (Respondents) (Bermuda)

  Lord Hodge,

  Lord Briggs,

  Lord Leggatt,

  Lord Richards,

  Lady Simler

  CS Life advances six grounds of appeal. In summary, it argues that judgment on the contractual claims is inconsistent with the contractual documentation and that there is no scope for any fiduciary duties. In the alternative, CS Life appeals on three grounds relating to quantum. It contends that damages (i) should be assessed on the basis of the specific transactions identified as objectionable by the experts, rather than on the basis that the entire portfolio should be replaced with an alternative medium risk portfolio from the outset (Ground 4); (ii) should have been calculated from the dates the LPI Policies were entered into rather than the date the Policy Assets were transferred into the name of CS Life (Ground 5); and (iii) should only have been calculated to August 2017 (Ground 6).

  Linked cases

  JCPC/2024/0035 Credit Suisse Life (Bermuda) Ltd (Respondent) v Bidzina Ivanishvili and 6 others (Appellants) No 2 (Bermuda)

  Cross-appeal

  ---

• UK Supreme Court

  Hearing

  18 June 2025

  Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs (Appellant) v HFFX LLP (Respondent)

  Lord Lloyd-Jones,

  Lord Sales,

  Lord Hamblen,

  Lord Burrows,

  Lady Rose

  (1) Does section 850 of the Income Tax (Trading and Other Income) Act 2005 (“ITTOIA”) apply to profits retained by a corporate member of a limited liability partnership and subsequently reallocated to individual members of that partnership pursuant to an incentivisation and deferral arrangement? (2) If the answer to (1) is no, are the profits allocated by a corporate member of a limited liability partnership to its individual members under an incentivisation and deferral arrangement chargeable income tax, either (A) as miscellaneous income under section 687 ITTOIA; or (B) as sales of occupation income under the Income Tax Act 2007 (“ITA”)?

  Linked cases

  UKSC/2024/0123 Atkins and others (Appellants) v Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs (Respondent)

  Legal issue

  ---

• The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council

  Judgment

  19 June 2025

  Gregory Pascall (Respondent) v Aneisa Graham (Appellant) (Trinidad and Tobago)

  Lord Briggs,

  Lord Leggatt,

  Lord Richards

  Was a deceased’s will invalid on the basis that the deceased did not know of and approve its contents?

  ---

• The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council

  Hearing

  23 June 2025

  Tyson Strachan (Appellant) v Albany Resort Operator Ltd (Respondent) (Bahamas)

  Lord Reed,

  Lord Burrows,

  Lord Stephens,

  Lady Rose,

  Lady Simler

  Did the Court of Appeal err in upholding the trial judge’s determination that the Appellant had not established to the civil standard that his employer was liable in negligence and that there was no case to answer?

  ---