Photo of Louise Freeman

Louise Freeman

Louise Freeman represents parties in complex commercial disputes and class actions, and co-chairs the firm’s Commercial Litigation and EMEA Dispute Resolution Practice Groups.

Described by Legal 500 as “one of London’s most effective partners,” Louise helps clients to navigate challenging situations in a range of industries, including technology, life sciences and financial markets. Most of her cases involve multiple parties and jurisdictions, where her strategic, dynamic advice is invaluable. Chambers notes "Louise is tactically and strategically brilliant and has phenomenal management skills on complex litigation," she is "a class act."

Louise also represents parties in significant competition law claims, including a number of the leading cases in England.

Louise is a “recognised name for complex class actions” (Legal 500), defending clients targeted in proposed opt-out and opt-in claims, as well as advising clients on multi-jurisdictional class action risks.

Contact:Read more about Louise FreemanEmail

The European Commission first published a proposal for an AI Liability Directive (“AILD”) in September 2022 as part of a broader set of initiatives, including proposals for a new Product Liability Directive (“new PLD”) and the EU AI Act (see our blog posts here, here and here).

The AILD was intended to introduce uniform rules for certain aspects of non-contractual civil claims relating to AI, by introducing disclosure requirements and rebuttable presumptions.

However, unlike the new PLD and EU AI Act, which have both been adopted and have entered into force, the AILD has encountered stagnation and resistance during the legislative process.Continue Reading The Future of the AI Liability Directive

Opt-out collective actions (i.e. US-style class actions) can only be brought in the UK as competition law claims.  Periodic proposals  to legislate to expand this regime to consumer law claims have so far faltered.  However, this is now back on the Parliamentary agenda.  Several members of the House of Lords have indicated their support for expanding the regime to allow consumers and small businesses to bring opt-out collective actions for breaches of consumer law, and potentially on other bases.

If implemented, this expansion would be very significant and would allow for many new types of class actions in the UK.  Tech companies are already prime targets as defendants to competition-related opt-out class actions.  An expansion of the regime to allow actions for breaches of consumer law, as well as competition law, would only increase their exposure further.

As there is now limited time for legislation to be passed to effect such changes before the UK Parliament is dissolved in advance of an upcoming general election, this may be an issue for the next Parliament.  It will therefore be important to assess what the UK’s main parties say on this – and any manifesto commitments – in the run-up to the election.Continue Reading UK Opt-Out Class Actions for Non-Competition Claims back on Parliamentary Agenda

On 9 October 2023, the European Parliament’s Internal Market and Consumer Protection Committee (IMCO) and Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI) agreed revised wording to amend the European Commission’s (the “EC”) proposed new Product Liability Directive (the “Directive”). The vote was passed with 33 votes in favour to 2 against. If adopted, the Directive will replace the existing (almost 40-year old) Directive 85/374/EEC on Liability for Defective Products, which imposes a form of strict liability on product manufacturers for harm caused by their defective products.Continue Reading EU Legislative Update on the New Product Liability Directive

In Penhallurick v MD5 Ltd [2021] EWHC 293 (IPEC) the Court held that the copyright in various literary works relating to software Mr. Penhallurick created during his tenure with former employer MD5 belonged to MD5. The Court found that the works were created in the course of Mr. Penhallurick’s employment with the result that MD5 was deemed the owner of the works (under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988), despite the fact that some of the work was done from Mr. Penhallurick’s home, outside normal office hours and using his own computer.
Continue Reading UK Court Rules on Copyright over Software Developed Whilst Working at Home