Reflections on LIDW 2026 – Managing Complexity in Collective and Commercial Disputes

Calendars were cleared by lawyers across the world for the flagship June event London International Disputes Week (LIDW) which attracts significant international attention. With London firmly established as a jurisdiction of choice for a wide range of disputes, this year was no exception with more than 300 events taking place across the week.

Hausfeld lawyers were honoured to contribute to eight of them, sharing their expertise on the latest developments in competition litigation, group actions, banking litigation and disputes in the aviation, crypto and directors’ duties spheres. This article distils the key themes and practical insights from those sessions.

Competition litigation

In his panel session, “Taking Stock: Where are we now with Collective Actions?”, Counsel Jonathan Amior examined the gatekeeping role played by the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) at the certification stage of proposed collective proceedings. The panel reflected on a series of recent Collective Proceedings Order judgments, highlighting how cases such as Evans, Neill v Sony, Ennis v Apple and Waterside are sharpening practitioners’ understanding of the CAT’s expectations regarding the typical issues in dispute.

In their session on “Managing Complexity: Junior Perspectives from Big CAT Cases”, Associates Abigail Masters and Kazi Elias shared their experiences working on large-scale collective actions, with a focus on utilising technology to bring value to the role of junior lawyers. As the collective actions regime develops and new CAT Practice Directions streamline procedures, the panel considered how best to manage increasingly extensive disclosure exercises, plan effectively for trial from an early stage and navigate use of AI. Throughout a collaborative and engaging discussion – also featuring defendant-side and junior counsel perspectives – the speakers offered practical career tips for junior practitioners.

Group action litigation

Building on the theme of growing complexity, the panel debate “Is the Group Actions Framework Fit for Purpose? Does it Provide Access to Justice?” examined whether the current group action regime adequately delivers redress in cases which cause mass harm. Partner Simon Bishop argued in favour of introducing an opt-out collective action mechanism for a broader set of claims falling outside the CAT’s jurisdiction, for example claims arising from events in the environmental, financial, consumer and data breach spheres, to ensure that those who suffer harm are not left without redress due to practical and economic (rather than legal) barriers.

Commercial disputes

Managing complexity also sat at the heart of the panels on banking, aviation, crypto and directors’ duties disputes, each highlighting distinct challenges in these areas of litigation against a rapidly evolving economic, political and regulatory backdrop in the UK and beyond.

Financial Services Disputes

As part of the “Banking disputes: a horizon scanning” session, Partner Lucy Pert joined a panel to discuss the recent Supreme Court judgment in the motor finance cases. The panel covered the legal challenges to the FCA redress scheme put in place to compensate the purchasers of motor finance. The panel also reflected on recent case law clarifying banks’ Quincecare duty to prevent fraud, and the Privy Council’s decision in Credit Suisse Life (Bermuda) Ltd v Ivanishvili, which held that, in the implied misrepresentation context, claimants need not show contemporaneous “conscious awareness” to establish reliance.

Aviation

In his sessions “Hot topics in aviation disputes” and “Aviation Conflict Risks”, Partner Ned Beale examined an industry operating as a “network under stress”. A review of the last 12 months’ aviation judgments shows a higher number of lessor claims, alongside public law, competition and planning regulatory challenges, and a noticeable uptick in security related cases linked to environmental protests. In this environment, the panel emphasised the importance of future proofing aviation contracts through robust drafting: ensuring consistent protections across multi contract arrangements, clear and aligned dispute resolution clauses, and carefully chosen jurisdiction and governing law. They also pointed to the potential benefits of specialist fora such as The Hague Court of Arbitration for Aviation, designed as a one stop shop for the aviation industry with procedures and expert evidence rules tailored to its needs.

Crypto

Similar threads of uncertainty in valuing assets, choosing the right fora and designing effective dispute resolution mechanisms were picked up by Rebecca Warder, Head of Knowledge Management, at the event “Crypto arbitration – stable as a coin or a (black) swan dive?”. The panel explored whether standard dispute resolution mechanisms are fit for purpose for disputes arising in the crypto sphere. It then reflected on the benefits of the LCAM Blockchain Arbitration Scheme, which is specifically designed to address these challenges by offering streamlined enforcement, agreed asset location, and party anonymity.

Directors’ duties

Managing liability risk was also central to the event “Directors at Risk: Knowledge, Oversight and Liability”, where Partner Greg Lascelles examined what the recent authorities on the duty to exercise reasonable care, skill and diligence mean in practice for individual directors (including NEDs), their organisations and liquidators. The discussion engaged with decisions that recognise some boardroom realities such as reasonable reliance on trusted advisers, alongside others which signal that courts are prepared to scrutinise more closely how directors discharge their duties under the Companies Act 2006. 

The ending note was that the risk profile of directorships is also shifting in light of closer regulatory oversight, more frequent investigations into potentially unlawful conduct, legislative developments and increasing stakeholder litigation.

Comment

The insights shared by Hausfeld’s lawyers underscore the continuing strength of London as a forum and England & Wales as a jurisdiction of choice for complex, high value disputes. The interactive debate across LIDW 2026 events highlights the ongoing trust placed in the English courts and English-seated tribunals in the context of a fast-changing world.