Łukasz Lasek: articles by this author
An interview with Łukasz Lasek and Piotr Golędzinowski from the Dispute Resolution & Arbitration practice on the possibilities of out-of-court dispute resolution, planning in the event of a dispute, and costly traps to avoid.
It is September 2020—hopefully a post-pandemic world. Your company has successfully weathered the storms of crisis, and social and economic life is slowly recovering its previous pace. Most people work at the office again, and you are on your way there. Before arriving at 9 am, you usually stop by the corner coffee place to have a morning espresso and browse the daily news. But at 8:15 am you get a call from the office. It is the receptionist, saying that the company has been approached by agents requesting to inspect the company’s files and computer system. You get to the office and find a few men waiting in black suits. They present a warrant and insist on starting the inspection immediately. It is a dawn raid. And the question is whether you are prepared to handle it.
One of the more serious consequences of the pandemic will be a wave of business litigation. However, strong arguments and credible evidence are not enough to win a dispute. It also takes resources to pursue a lawsuit, and soon that may be particularly difficult to come by.
Two conditions must be met for a civil dispute to be resolved effectively: at the earliest stage of the case it must be precisely defined what is truly disputed between the parties, and the proceeding should be planned so that those issues can be focused on. If this can be achieved, the parties and the court can devote their energy and attention to the truly relevant issues. This will improve the speed and quality of judicial decisions, legal certainty, and security of commerce.
When hackers exploited vulnerability due to software not being updated at a US credit agency, important data of millions of customers in the US, Canada, and the UK were leaked. The US federal authorities have launched an investigation that could lead to millions in fines. Bosses at the firm were questioned in a congressional hearing and the agency is facing the largest class action in US history. This sounds like the plot of a financial thriller, but the Equifax case did in fact happen and is a lesson for the future.
Demand guarantees are among the most popular methods of securing international commercial transactions. They may be used to secure both the payment of fees and satisfactory performance of particular works. The popularity of these guarantees (sometimes also referred to as payment guarantees) can be attributed to the fact that they are issued by trustworthy and globally recognisable financial institutions (usually banks and insurance companies), and their operation is governed by universal rules well-understood in the business community. Guarantees are also independent of the underlying relationship between the parties, and the payment conditions are based on objective criteria, eliminating the potential for unexpected interpretations and actions by the parties. Given these factors, it is understandable that disputes regarding payment guarantees can usually be avoided. However, when they do occur, they usually involve substantial sums, with the potential to affect the financial liquidity of the companies involved.