Insights

Part Two of a Two-Part Client Alert Series. This Alert builds on the discussion in Part One, which surveyed Bear Creek (2017), Copper Mesa (2016), South American Silver (2018), Eco Oro (2021), and Lupaka (2025).

September 2026 marks the first anniversary of the corporate criminal offence of failure to prevent fraud coming into force under section 199 of the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 (ECCTA). The Home Office guidance recommends that organisations review their fraud prevention measures at least every 12 months.

This Alert, the first in a two-part series, surveys the legal landscape at the intersection of two issues that increasingly shape the outcome of mining and natural resources disputes regarding the protections available to foreign investors under investment treaties, as enforced through Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS). The first is the prior consultation obligation imposed on States under the Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (No. 169), adopted by the International Labour Organization (ILO 169). The second is social license, the practical acceptance of a project by surrounding communities, which is distinct from but related to the formal State consultation duty. This Alert examines these issues across five foundational ISDS decisions:

The UK Supreme Court has unanimously dismissed the appeal of Mr Francesco Costa, former chairman of Spring Media Investments Limited, in the first Supreme Court judgment to consider the scope of the duty under section 172(1) of the Companies Act 2006. The foundational position is that good faith requires honest conduct as well as honest thinking. A director's genuine belief that they are acting in the company's best interests will not excuse covert or disloyal conduct in pursuit of that belief. 

English law has long treated the choice between terminating for repudiatory breach and exercising a contractual termination right as consequential. Under the Financings[1] causation principle, a party exercising a contractual right for a non-repudiatory breach could recover losses accrued to the date of termination — but nothing more. Loss of bargain was out of reach unless the breach went to the root of the contract. A practical workaround, confirmed in Lombard,[2] was to designate the relevant obligation as a condition, elevating any breach to repudiatory status, but that device carries significant strategic risk if the termination is later found to have been wrongful.

Of particular interest for investors with interests in Canada or the UAE, for counsel advising on treaty coverage, dispute strategy, or treaty design, the Canada-UAE FIPA is essential reading and the clearest evidence yet of where Canada's investment treaty practice stands over 30 years after NAFTA came into force.

The State of Qatar has enacted Law No. (8) of 2026, amending certain provisions of Law No. (4) of 2008 concerning the Leasing of Real Estate.

The International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) has released its revised 2026 Arbitration Rules (the 2026 Rules), which entered into force on 1 June 2026. The revisions represent a significant update to the 2021 ICC Rules (the 2021 Rules) and reflect a clear institutional focus on efficiency, procedural flexibility, and expedited dispute resolution.

The UK has successfully concluded a milestone free trade agreement (FTA) with the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries. We set out below a high-level comment on the FTA’s chapters and some of the key provisions.

From June 11 to July 19, 2026, 16 cities across the United States, Mexico, and Canada will host the 2026 FIFA Men’s World Cup, the largest in history. For construction firms, vendors, and suppliers, this trinational event has presented a significant commercial opportunity. Yet, cross-border projects involving parties operating under three distinct legal systems — common law in the United States and Canada, and civil law in Mexico — also create fertile ground for commercial disputes. Given the scale, technical complexity, and commercial significance of the FIFA World Cup and all the projects surrounding it, disputes are often unavoidable. As companies navigate intricate contractual obligations across multiple jurisdictions, international arbitration may play a pivotal role in resolving conflicts tied to these major commercial undertakings.

It has been a couple of years since the introduction of Qatar's Judicial Enforcement Law No. 4 of 2024 (the Judicial Enforcement Law), but enforcement is still a process that many do not understand. It is therefore perhaps worth a reminder of the law and its far-reaching scope. I conclude the article with a brief look at how the law has benefitted creditors.

The first applications to lift an automatic suspension under the Procurement Act 2023 (the Act) have recently been decided. In Parkingeye Limited v Velindre University NHS Trust & Anor [2026] EWHC 1019 (TCC), handed down on 1 May 2026, HHJ Keyser KC dismissed applications by two NHS contracting authorities to lift the suspension preventing them from concluding a car park management services contract. This is the first judicial consideration of the new test under section 102(2) of the Act.

Businesses affected by the Strait of Hormuz crisis are likely to be navigating both sides of the contractual liability equation: seeking to enforce protections while simultaneously trying to limit their own exposure. This balancing act will feel familiar to those who managed supply chain disruptions during the Covid pandemic or in response to Russian sanctions. But the scale of uncertainty and the severity of the current situation make it particularly challenging to chart a clear path forward. This note provides an overview of the English-law issues that have arisen in this current crisis and is relevant for companies and legal counsel seeking to understand and mitigate contractual risk in their supply chains, including for shipping, energy, commodities, and construction.

The president of the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) has signalled a more rigorous approach to scrutinising opt-out collective actions at the certification stage, with particular attention to whether the financial benefits of such claims flow to the claimant class or primarily to their lawyers and funders. Coming at a time when the UK Law Commission is consulting on expanding the scope of the opt-out regime, this development warrants careful consideration by all those with interests in the UK litigation funding market.

The ICCU is poised to become one of the most significant international compensation mechanisms of this generation. Crowell & Moring has the experience to help with your claim.

On 12 March 2026, the USTR self-initiated Section 301(b) investigations against 60 of the United States' largest trading partners, including the United Kingdom. The investigations will examine whether each economy's acts, policies, and practices relating to the failure to impose and effectively enforce a ban on goods produced with forced labour are unreasonable or discriminatory and burden or restrict U.S. commerce.

In March 2026, the UK Government published its Fraud Strategy 2026–2029, part of a broader economic-crime policy package building on the Economic Crime Plan 2 (March 2023) and the Anti-Corruption Strategy, published in December 2025. The strategy's headline message for fraud victims is striking: do not wait for the state to act, but rather, seek redress from the court yourself.

The Pilot codifies the position at common law, set out by Lady Hale in Cape Intermediate Holdings Ltd v Dring [2019] UKSC 38, which permits the public the right of access to documents placed before a court and referenced in a public hearing[4]. This Pilot will apply to cases heard in the Commercial Court, the London Circuit Commercial Court (King’s Bench Division), and the Financial List (Commercial Court and Chancery Division)[5].

In recent years, there has been a wave of new legislation impacting contracts and contractual terms. The Belgian legislator is gradually adopting the different Books of the Belgian Civil Code, and the Belgian Code of Economic Law has been updated several times. These changes affect the way contract terms need to be drafted, not only between companies but also with consumers.

A charity will be in scope of the new failure to prevent fraud offence if they meet two of the three following criteria: