Advertise on podcast: One Essex Conversations

In this episode, Matthew Hoyle is joined by Andrew McLeod to discuss the landmark decision of the Supreme Court in THG v Zedra Trust [2026] UKSC 6 on limitation in unfair prejudice disputes, including its potentially wide ranging implications for company, insolvency and commercial disputes more generally.

Matthew Hoyle is joined by Niranjan Venkatesan KC to discuss the Court of Appeal's recent decision in Adcamp LLP v Office Properties, on the circumstances in which a defendant may be substituted after the expiry of a limitation period. They consider whether the decision clears up the controversies which have lingered in this area, whether the law is now in a satisfactory state, and the prospects of the issue being revisited in the future.

Matthew Hoyle is joined by Hannah Glover to discuss the Court of Appeal's decision in Fridman v Agrofirma, on whether service may be made on persons who are not present within the jurisdiction. They discuss some of the previous tensions in the case law on this topic, whether the Court of Appeal decision provides clear guidance for commercial practitioners going forward, and whether it is really the last word on the topic.

In episode 2, Matthew Hoyle is joined by Dame Elizabeth Gloster to discuss the Supreme Court's judgment in Evans v Barclays Bank, and its implications for those who practise outside of competition law. They discuss how the merits of a claim can factor into case management decisions even if a claim survives strike out, and the Supreme Court's forceful restatement of the (in)famous 'rule in Hollington v Hewthorn'.

In this debut episode, Matthew Hoyle is joined by Joe Johnson to discuss the Privy Council's decision in Jardine Strategic v Oasis and its implications for legal professional privilege. They explore the history and decline of the shareholder rule, the rise and fall of joint interest privilege, and what this development means for commercial litigators and companies navigating shareholder disputes.