(Reuters) -Anaconda, a leading provider of open-source Python software for data science and AI, has raised more than $150 million in a Series C funding round led by Insight Partners, with additional participation from Abu Dhabi’s Mubadala Capital.
The funding round values the startup at $1.5 billion, Bloomberg News reported, citing a person familiar with the matter.
The company said on Thursday the fresh capital will support product development, potential acquisitions, and international expansion, as well as provide liquidity for employees.
The funding comes amid increased competition in the enterprise AI software sector, with Python continuing to dominate as the programming language of choice for AI development.
U.S. startup funding has surged 75.6% in the first half of 2025, led by the AI boom, putting it on track for its second-best year ever, even as venture capital firms struggled to raise money, according to PitchBook.
This year’s boom has been driven largely by major AI investments and bold bets from big tech companies, a wave of activity set off by the debut of ChatGPT in late 2022. In the past three months alone, $69.9 billion was invested in U.S. startups.
Anaconda did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment regarding the valuation.
The company is seeking to capitalize on growing enterprise demand for open-source tools as organizations shift from isolated data science projects to broader AI applications.
The startup has also expanded its leadership team, hiring executives with backgrounds in enterprise technology and product innovation.
The funding follows Anaconda’s launch of a new AI platform and a partnership with Databricks.
(Reporting by Kritika Lamba in Bengaluru; Editing by Shailesh Kuber)
In this installment of Powered by FINPRO, Everett Hansen, US Nuclear Energy leader, highlights the industry’s ongoing evolution and emphasizes the unique and complex risks associated with nuclear assets.
Hansen underscores the importance of regulatory oversight and stresses that early risk assessment and cross-industry collaboration are essential for success in helping organizations navigate complex timelines and mitigate liabilities.
BALTIMORE (July 31, 2025) – Constellation (Nasdaq: CEG), the nation’s largest producer of emissions-free, reliable energy and a leading energy supplier to businesses, homes and public sector customers, and GridBeyond, an international leader in Front of the Meter, Behind the Meter, and demand response (DR) grid solutions, are collaborating to use GridBeyond’s AI-powered predictive analytics platform to help business customers in PJM cut costs by reducing energy use during peak periods. Beyond the cost savings, DR also helps solve an urgent problem for grid operators and power generation owners: how to meet rising demand for reliable energy at a time when, outside of a handful of peak hours, the grid is vastly under-utilized. At scale, this new offering could help significantly reduce strain on the grid when energy supply is tight, lowering costs for all energy consumers and reducing the need to build new, expensive and unnecessary generation facilities.
A recent study by Duke University confirmed that much of America’s growing demand for energy could easily be met if some large energy users curtailed their energy use for just a few hours of the year. That’s because the electric grid was designed to serve the maximum electricity demand at any time, such as a sweltering hot July weekday, even though up to a third of that generation sits idle 80 percent of the time, on temperate fall or spring days or during nights and weekends. As a result, the grid is underutilized outside of peak periods. The Duke study confirmed that if large energy users were financially incentivized to cut energy use by just 0.25 percent, the U.S. could absorb 76 gigawatts of additional energy consumption without building a single new power plant. To put that into perspective, reaching 76 gigawatts would require construction of approximately 127 combined cycle gas plants, more than 21,000 wind turbines or 190 million solar panels. The average duration of curtailment would be just 1.7 hours per year, during which a large energy user could reduce or pause their operations, shift workload to other facilities or switch to backup generators.
“This demand response platform is a better, cheaper, and faster way to meet America’s growing energy needs, help win the AI race, and lower costs for consumers,” said Joe Dominguez, president and CEO of Constellation. “As the energy provider for 75 percent of America’s Fortune 100 companies, Constellation is well positioned to explore and eventually scale up this new and improved DR program. It’s just one of the ways we’re putting AI to work to solve one of the nation’s biggest challenges, the growing need for always-on power.”
DR programs were once a popular and effective tool for price protection and grid stability during peak demand periods, but that changed when U.S. electricity prices dropped, and the financial benefits fell short of what many businesses considered worthwhile. Today DR is getting a second look, thanks to advances in the accuracy of AI data modelling, tighter energy supplies, rising costs and the expansion of U.S. data centers.
Today’s announcement comes shortly after PJM, the nation’s largest grid operator, released the results of its most recent capacity auction, which attracted nearly 2,700 megawatts of new generation but no increase in DR resources. This new AI-powered program will add new DR resources in PJM by offering business customers an unprecedented opportunity to cut energy costs and unlock new revenue streams, helping market operators maintain system reliability.
GridBeyond’s AI platform provides a digital twin model of a customer’s site that enables it to virtually model scenarios that can deliver real-time energy optimization and help customers save money by participating in the economic rewards of grid-balancing services. This collaboration can also help lower customers’ energy costs and relieves pressure on the grid during the critical few hours per year when electricity use peaks and costs significantly spike.
“GridBeyond has long been committed to helping its customers manage energy consumption,” said Michael Phelan, Chief Executive Officer of GridBeyond. “We are delighted about our collaboration with Constellation that will bring innovative solutions that deliver both cost savings and sustainability benefits that empower businesses to take control of their energy usage.”
Unlike traditional DR tools, GridBeyond’s platform integrates predictive analytics and advanced metering capabilities, allowing customers to use real-time grid data and automated systems to control which of their operations to curtail to maximize DR revenues and cost savings while minimizing disruption to overall operations. GridBeyond also brings the ability to isolate loads at a sub-meter level, which gives customers detailed information about the energy use of each system or piece of equipment in their operations.
Constellation has been working to meet America’s growing energy needs by increasing output from its nuclear plants, restarting the Crane Clean Energy Center in Pennsylvania and extending the operating licenses of its nuclear fleet. The GridBeyond collaboration is another part of Constellation’s broader strategy to ensure adequate sources of clean energy are available on the grid and provide innovative solutions for its consumers that can be implemented in the short term and have outsized positive impact on the grid in the long term.
Roblox stock soared 16% Thursday after the company reported second-quarter revenue that beat expectations amid strong user growth.
The gaming platform saw $1.44 billion in net bookings, up 51% over the year prior. Analysts polled by LSEG expected $1.24 billion in net bookings for the quarter.
User and engagement numbers were also strong for the company, with daily active users at 111.8 million, up 41% year-over-year, and hours engaged at 27.4 billion, up 58% year-over-year.
StreetAccount expected 106 million DAUs.
“Our year on year growth this quarter is a reflection of our strategic investments in infrastructure and performance, discovery, and the virtual economy, which continue to create fertile conditions for creators to thrive as part of a healthy, interconnected ecosystem,” said CEO David Baszucki in a release.
Baszucki added that the company is looking to grab 10% of the global gaming content market.
Roblox raised its booking guidance for the third quarter and now expects between $1.59 billion and $1.64 billion. FactSet expected $1.42 billion in third-quarter bookings.
The gaming platform did report a net loss of $279.38 million, a loss of 41 cents per share. Roblox had a net loss of $205.88 million, a loss of 32 cents per share, in the same quarter a year ago.
The platform rolled out new age verification tools two weeks ago, as the broader gaming industry and app stores have faced regulatory pressure to improve safety for young users and limit access to certain types of content.
Roblox Chief Safety Officer Matt Kaufman said the age-estimation tools will help keep younger users from accessing “something that should be limited to an older audience — 13 and over.”
Kaufman said having more mature content opportunities will help teens and adults stay on Roblox instead of moving to other platforms.
(Pew Research Center illustration; photo via Getty Images)How we did this
Pew Research Center conducted this study to understand Americans’ experiences with and views of online scams and attacks. For this analysis, we surveyed 9,397 adults from April 14 to 20, 2025. Everyone who took part in this survey is a member of the Center’s American Trends Panel (ATP), a group of people recruited through national, random sampling of residential addresses who have agreed to take surveys regularly. This kind of recruitment gives nearly all U.S. adults a chance of selection. Interviews were conducted either online or by telephone with a live interviewer. The survey is weighted to be representative of the U.S. adult population by gender, race, ethnicity, partisan affiliation, education and other factors. Read more about the ATP’s methodology.
Here are the questions used for this report, the topline and the survey methodology.
Online scams and other internet crimes are skyrocketing, with a record $16.6 billion in losses reported to the FBI in 2024. The federal government, banks and companies are all sounding alarms. And the public is also wary, with many having firsthand experience:
Nearly all Americans view online scams and attacks as a national problem. More than nine-in-ten say online scams and attacks are a problem in the country, including 79% who describe them as a major problem.
Most U.S. adults have been a victim of an online scam or attack. We find that 73% of U.S. adults have ever experienced things like credit card fraud, ransomware or online shopping scams.
While Americans see older adults as more vulnerable to these crimes, significant portions of both older and younger adults have been scammed and targeted online. These are some of the key findings from a Pew Research Center survey of 9,397 U.S. adults conducted from April 14 to 20, 2025.
We asked Americans if six different types of online scams or attacks had happened to them. Overall, about three-quarters (73%) say at least one has, with 32% saying it’s happened in the past year.
Of the six, Americans most commonly report that online hackers made fraudulent charges on their credit or debit card. About half of U.S. adults (48%) report this has happened to them.
Roughly a quarter to a third report that three other types of scams happened to them:
36% say they purchased an item online that never arrived or was counterfeit and it was not refunded.
29% say a personal online account was hacked, such as a social media, email or bank account.
24% say they got a scam email, text message or call that led them to give away personal information.
One-in-ten or fewer say the remaining two scams and online attacks happened:
10% say that ransomware blocked use of their computer until they paid money.
7% say they gave money to a fake online investment opportunity, such as for real estate or stocks.
Many Americans have had multiple types of online scams happen to them. About one-in-five (22%) say they’ve experienced two of six, and the same share say three or more.
By age
Large portions of both older and younger adults report that scams and online attacks have happened to them.
About three-quarters of adults under 30, as well as those ages 30 to 49 and 50 to 64, report ever experiencing an online scam or attack. A slightly smaller share of those 65 and older (66%) report the same.
Additionally, experiencing multiple types of scams or attacks is roughly on par across age groups.
By race and ethnicity
While there are no differences between racial and ethnic groups in experiencing at least one of the scams or attacks, Black, Hispanic and Asian adults are more likely than White adults to have had multiple forms of these frauds happen to them.
For example, about three-in-ten Black or Hispanic adults have faced three or more types of online scams or attacks, compared with 18% of White adults.
By income
Americans in households across income levels are about as likely to say they’ve ever experienced at least one of the online scams. But those in households with lower incomes are more likely to say at least three have happened.
Go to the Appendix for a demographic breakdown of each of the six scams and online attacks.
Scam messages
Online scams target Americans in variety of ways, including phone calls, texts and emails. According to our survey, a majority of U.S. adults report getting scam phone calls (68%), emails (63%) or text messages (61%) at least weekly that attempt to get their personal information. One-third get these messages on social media at the same frequency.
These attempts to get personal information aren’t just a weekly occurrence; for some, they’re a daily reality.
31% say they get scam phone calls at least daily, including 21% who say this happens several times a day.
28% say they get daily scam emails.
20% encounter this by text message on a daily basis.
Fewer (11%) say the same for social media.
Go to the Appendix for the demographic breakdown of those who have experienced scam messages in each way.
Financial losses and impact on financial well-being
More money is being lost to online scams and cybercriminals than ever before, according to the FBI.
In our survey, roughly one-in-five U.S. adults (21%) say they have ever lost money because of an online scam or attack.
By age
Younger Americans are slightly more likely than their older counterparts to say they have lost money because of an online scam or attack.
About a quarter of 18- to 29-year-olds say they’ve lost money in this way, compared with 15% of those 65 and older.
By race and ethnicity
There are also differences by race and ethnicity. Black, Hispanic and Asian adults are more likely than White adults to say they have lost money because of an online scam or attack.
By household income
Those with lower incomes (26%) are more likely than those in upper-income households (15%) to say they have lost money in this way. Those in middle-income households fall in between the two other groups (20%).
Financial impact
For some, losing money in an online scam was financially burdensome. Among those who’ve lost money because of an online scam or attack:
30% say it hurt their personal finances a great deal (11%) or a fair amount (19%).
Another 27% said it hurt their finances to some extent.
But about four-in-ten said this had little (31%) to no harm (11%) on them financially.
Contacting law enforcement
Most people who’ve been a financial victim to an online scam or attack never contacted the authorities.
Roughly three-quarters of this group say they have not reported to law enforcement that they lost money from an online scam or attack. A minority of this group – 26% – say they have informed law enforcement.
By how much it hurt personal finances
Americans who have been significantly harmed financially by an online scam are far more likely to say they informed law enforcement:
42% of those whose finances were hurt a great deal or fair amount reported it.
Fewer (24%) of those whose finances were hurt some say they did the same.
And just 16% of those whose finances were hurt a little or not at all say they reported it.
Vulnerability to online scams and attacks
Amid debates about which age groups are most vulnerable to online scams, Americans show greater concern for older adults.
A vast majority of Americans (84%) say adults 65 and older are extremely or very likely to fall victim to online scams and attacks.
This is far higher than the 22% who say this of adults 30 and under. An additional 48% say it is somewhat likely to happen to this age group.
Americans do not see education as a big factor in whether someone will fall for an online scam. But a somewhat greater share of U.S. adults say those with lower levels of formal education are vulnerable:
29% say those without a four-year college degree are extremely or very likely to fall victim.
18% say the same of those who have a four-year degree.
For both, Americans most commonly say this is somewhat likely to happen.
By age
Large shares of all age groups say older adults are vulnerable to online scams. About eight-in-ten adults under 30 (82%) – and the same share of those 65 and older – say those 65 and up are extremely or very likely to have this happen to them.
Older Americans are more likely than the youngest adults to say adults 30 and under are vulnerable. Just 15% of 18- to 29-year-olds say adults 30 and under are highly likely to fall for one. This is lower than the 27% of those 65 and older and 25% of those 50 to 64 who say this.
Knowing how to avoid falling for an online scam
When it comes to their own vulnerability, Americans overall feel they are quite knowledgeable in how to detect online scams and attacks.
Most Americans (71%) say they know at least a fair amount about how to avoid falling for an online scam or attack. This includes 26% who say they know a great deal.
Very few (10%) report knowing little to nothing, and about one-in-five say they know some.
By age
Majorities across age groups say they know at least a fair amount about how to avoid falling for an online scam or attack, but older Americans are less likely to say this. For example, Americans ages 65 and older are less likely than 18- to 29-year-olds to say this (64% vs. 78%).
By race and ethnicity
Three-quarters of White adults say they know a great deal or fair amount about how to avoid falling for one. This is higher than among Hispanic (59%), Black (66%) and Asian (66%) adults.
Americans’ concern about online scams
Nearly all Americans say online scams and attacks are a problem for people in the United States. This includes about eight-in-ten who say they are a major problem and 19% who say they are a minor problem.
Only 1% say online scams and attacks are not a problem for people in the U.S.
By age
Younger adults are less likely to say online scams are a big issue, though majorities of all age groups say this. About two-thirds of those ages 18 to 29 (65%) say online scams are a major problem. This compares with nearly nine-in-ten of 50- to 64-year-olds and those 65 and older.
Online fraud spans many digital spaces, but the public sees some environments as more of an issue for fraud than others.
We asked Americans about eight different types of platforms. About six-in-ten or more say online scams are a major problem on text messages and phone calls, emails and social media. And about a quarter more also say each is a minor problem.
Americans are less likely to say online scams are a major problem on the other types of platforms asked about:
Between 46% and 50% say this of online shopping, banking and payment sites and apps.
About four-in-ten say this of dating or cryptocurrency platforms.
Go to the Appendix for the demographic breakdown of views about whether online scams are a problem on each type of platform.
The role of artificial intelligence in online scams and attacks
Americans are becoming more familiar with artificial intelligence (AI) while also growing more concerned about its impact on daily life. When it comes to online scams and attacks, mostAmericans say AI will make them more frequent.
In fact, about seven-in-ten (68%) say the increased use of AI is going to make online scams and attacks more common. Very few say AI will make them less common (4%) or will make no difference (8%). The remaining 20% are unsure.
Government and tech companies’ efforts in reducing online scams and attacks
From awareness campaigns to legislation to AI, the federal government and technology companies use a number of tactics to combat online fraud.
The survey asked Americans to rate how each group is faring at reducing the number of online scams and attacks in the U.S. Americans on balance see both more negatively than positively – especially the government:
68% say the federal government is doing a very or somewhat bad job; three-in-ten say it’s doing a good job.
56% say technology companies are doing a bad job at this, versus 42% who express a favorable view of their efforts.
By party
Majorities of both Republicans (66%) and Democrats (72%), including independents who lean to either party, say the federal government is doing a very or somewhat bad job at reducing the amount of online scams and attacks.
Republicans and Democrats also share similar views on the job that technology companies are doing. More than half in each group say these companies are not doing well in reducing online scams and attacks in this country. In both cases, Democrats are slightly more likely than Republicans to say this.
DLA Piper obtained a complete dismissal with prejudice of an action filed in the Delaware Chancery Court against clients GigAcquisitions2, LLC, GigCapital2, Inc., UpHealth, Inc., Avi Katz, and Raluca Dinu, with the Court rejecting all claims with no exception.
The plaintiffs in the dispute were equity holders of Cloudbreak Health, which provides healthcare language interpretation services. Cloudbreak Health combined with UpHealth Holdings, which provides behavioral health and pharmacy services, as part of a de-SPAC merger with GigCapital2 that took place in June 2021, and which involved other companies acquired by UpHealth Holdings. The plaintiffs alleged they were fraudulently induced into the merger and that the delivery of their merger consideration was delayed, leaving them unable to sell their shares at a higher price.
In a 51-page decision, the Court found that many of the plaintiffs’ claims were not “reasonably conceivable,” and that the rest were time-barred.
The DLA Piper team consisted of Partner Melanie Walker (Los Angeles), who handled the oral argument, Partner Ron Brown (Wilmington), Of Counsel Kelly Freund (Wilmington), and Associate Emma Peplow (Los Angeles) with assistance from Partners Richard Zelichov (Los Angeles) and Jeffrey Selman (San Francisco).
TOKYO, July 31, 2025 – FUJIFILM Corporation (President and CEO, Representative Director: Teiichi Goto) today announced that the company has appointed Brian O’Donnelly as its Corporate Vice President, strengthening global leadership to drive growth in the Electronic Materials Business. He will continue serving as the President and CEO of FUJIFILM Electronic Materials USA, Inc., Senior Deputy General Manager of the Electronic Materials Business Division, FUJIFILM Corporation and Global Vice President of FUJIFILM Electronic Materials.
Born and educated in Scotland, O’Donnelly has spent the majority of his 40-year career working in the Chemical and Semiconductor Materials industries, joining Fujifilm group in 2004. In 2014, he was appointed President and CEO of FUJIFILM Electronic Materials USA, where he has led significant growth of the business and its contributions to Fujifilm through new product development, customer and product portfolio expansions, and mergers and acquisitions.
“Brian is a strong leader who has long contributed to the development of the Fujifilm’s Electronic Materials business, not just in North America, but also globally through strategic acquisitions and integrations that have allowed us to expand our portfolio of products and services to meet the needs of the world’s top semiconductor manufacturers,” said Tetsuya Iwasaki, Director, Senior Vice President and General Manager of the Electronic Materials Business Division, who leads the global business.
Prior to joining Fujifilm, O’Donnelly worked for Olin Corporation’s Materials Metal Research Labs in R&D, as well as Arch Chemicals, where he held progressively more senior roles in finance, strategic planning, M&A and business management within its Chemicals and Electronic Materials Divisions.
“I am looking forward to continuing to help our global business realize its full growth potential and be the leading and most trusted Electronic Materials partner in the global semiconductor industry,” said O’Donnelly. “As Corporate Vice President at FUJIFILM Corporation, I am honored to contribute to the company’s commitment to global diversity and to be part of an inclusive leadership culture that reflects our expanding global business portfolio.”
O’Donnelly holds a PhD in Metallurgy from the University of Strathclyde in Glasgow, Scotland. He earned his MBA in Finance & Strategy Planning from the University of New Haven in Connecticut.
AXA France IARD SA (and another) v Santander Cards UK Limited (and another) [2025] EWHC 1881 (Comm)
This commercial (rather than coverage) dispute saw AXA pursuing Santander for recovery of payments made to customers who were mis-sold payment protection insurance (PPI) on store cards more than 20 years ago. On the specific facts of AXA v Santander, the Judge found that liability for pre-2005 sales rested with the credit lender and not with the insurer as a result of a contractual indemnity provision. Judgment was accordingly given for AXA. This judgment highlights that customer compensation may only be the first stage in cases of systemic retail mis-selling; the commercial and financial fallout for the firms involved can take decades to conclude.
Background
Briefly, a customer would take out a retailer-branded credit card, to which PPI could be added. Premium was charged monthly and added to the credit balance. Generally, 95% of the premium, after payment of claims, was paid to the credit lender, with around 5% retained by the insurer.
The PPI policies at issue were underwritten by various predecessors of AXA and the policies were sold as an adjunct to store cards by various predecessors of Santander.
Interestingly, the predecessor entities – involved both in the credit lending and the underwriting – were all part of the GE corporate group. GE Capital Bank, which sold the PPI policies to customers, was acquired by Santander in 2009. Companies in the GE Capital group also underwrote the PPI policies, before being transferred to Genworth in 2004 and later acquired by AXA in 2015.
This case concerned PPI policies sold prior to 2005, some of which dated back as far as the 1970s. That is because, from January 2005, credit lenders became regulated entities in relation to their insurance mediation activities and the credit lenders were therefore responsible for complaints relating to later policies. Santander accordingly handled and paid compensation in relation to customer complaints relating to post-2005 PPI policies amounting to some £235 million and did not seek recovery from AXA for that.
With respect to pre-2005 PPI policies, in July 2017, Santander advised Genworth that it would no longer handle and pay claims relating to these. Absent customer information from which to handle those complaints itself or appoint another firm, Genworth eventually entered into a claims handling agreement with Santander, pursuant to which Santander agreed to continue to provide claims handling services for a fee but with all redress and costs to be borne by Genworth. That is despite Genworth having received just 5% of the premium, none of the interest charged by the credit lenders on the premium, and yet been liable to customers for statutory interest on both premium and interest.
When AXA acquired Genworth, not knowing the full scope of Genworth’s liability for PPI mis-selling, terms were discussed and eventually a compromise entered into pursuant to which Genworth would bear the liability. It is therefore Genworth, rather than AXA, that stands to benefit from AXA’s claim against Santander. Redress costs relating to pre-2005 sales amount to almost £500 million, plus more than £70 million in respect of fees payable to FOS, in addition to internal costs.
AXA’s claims against Santander
AXA claimed against Santander: (i) that pursuant to the terms of a (disputed) settlement agreement between them, Santander are liable for all the compensation of any mis-selling prior to 2005; (ii) that Santander is obliged to indemnify AXA against any liability arising out of its predecessors’ acts or omissions pursuant to an indemnity clause contained in an agency; (iii) for contribution, under the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 on the basis that both AXA and Santander were liable to the customers whose claims were paid by AXA; and/or (iv) in negligence for breach of duties owed by Santander’s predecessors, as agent of AXA’s predecessors.
Santander counter-claimed: (i) in relation to a profit share arrangement; and (ii) for recovery and apportionment of sums previously paid by Santander in the event that AXA’s claim for contribution succeeded.
The High Court findings
In relation to the second claim, the Judge held that Santander was liable to indemnify AXA under the agency agreement, which stated, at clause 12.2: “Subject to the Insurer complying with their duties under this agreement, GE-CB [GE Capital Bank – the insurer’s agent] will indemnify the Insurer against any liability which they may incur by reason of any act or omission by GE-CB (including negligence) while performing their duties under this agreement.”
That indemnity was found to extend both to redress payments and FOS fees. Santander had argued that there was not a “liability” for the purpose of the indemnity but the Judge held that Santander is liable for “all the regulatory consequences” of the mis-selling “irrespective of whether individual complaints would have succeeded in a court of law” [313]. As the Judge put it:
“[The insurers] were under a binding regulatory obligation, which had statutory force, to pay such redress as was appropriate under the relevant rules. The sausage which came out of the regulatory machine was accordingly a liability to pay redress and if [the insurers] had failed to do so, not only could the regulator have taken enforcement action against them, but the customer had a civil route by which it could secure payment, even if only indirectly by way of damages.” [292]
With respect to FOS complaints, the Judge was of the view that it was a “distinction without a difference” if the insurers compensated customers “on the basis of a provisional decision rather than a final award”. “The decision of the FOS may have been provisional, but it was still a decision which stood unless and until challenged by either party. I am therefore satisfied that payment pursuant to such a decision was also a liability for the purposes of the indemnity.” [294]
As for causation, the Judge held that “there can be no doubt that the redress payments and FOS fees are liabilities which were proximately and effectively caused by the mis-selling”. [298]
As for AXA’s other causes of action, AXA’s claims under the settlement agreement failed as the Judge held that any agreement that may have been reached was subject to contract. Further, the Contribution Act claim failed. With respect to the “same damage” requirement of a claim under the Contribution Act, AXA accepted that FOS fees and administrative costs are not sums for which Santander was “liable” within the meaning of the Contribution Act but AXA argued that there was such a liability for redress payments. Interestingly, while the Judge rejected Santander’s argument that a regulatory liability to pay redress was not a “liability” for the purposes of the indemnity claim, the Judge accepted Santander’s argument that a regulatory liability to pay redress was not a “liability” to the customer that the customer could enforce directly for the purpose of the Contribution Act claim: “Section 1(6) [of the Contribution Act 1978] contemplates that the action brought by the person who suffered the damage must be one which has established or is capable of establishing the liability. However, the only civil claims that could have been asserted by consumers would have been for breach of rules 1.4.1 or 1.4.4 of DISP and, far from being in breach these rules, AXA/Genworth appear to have observed them meticulously. Likewise, it may be that AXA/Genworth were under a regulatory liability to pay redress or satisfy FOS awards, but that was because of an obligation owed to the regulator, not because they were under any liability to the consumer which the consumer could enforce directly. Moreover, the obligation under rule 1.4.1 is to pay redress when the insurer decides it is appropriate to do so. It is difficult to see how an action for breach of 1.4.1 can prescribe positively how that discretion should have been exercised. The same difficulty arises in relation to the obligation under rule 1.4.4 to satisfy FOS awards.”
Finally, AXA’s claim against the credit lender in negligence succeeded in principle, and without deduction for contributory negligence, although subject to limitation (AXA accepted that most of this head of claim was time-barred, surviving only for policies sold after 7 December 2002).
The Judge held that the credit lenders (the agents) owed the insurers (their principal) a duty to avoid putting the insurers in breach of their regulatory obligations. As to the scope of this duty, the Court rejected Santander’s argument (which cited Manchester Building Society v Grant Thornton UK LLP [2021] UKSC 20) that losses resulting from the fact that a statutory redress requirement was established in 2010 were unforeseeable and fell outside the scope of any duty altogether because there was no sufficient nexus between the loss and the subject-matter of GECB’s duty – the so-called “duty nexus” requirement in the MBS judgment. The Judge held that regulatory consequences flowing from systemic non-compliance fell within the scope of the duty: it was obvious that regulatory standards evolve and that breaches could trigger complaints and regulatory remedies.
The credit lenders breached that duty by failing to exercise all reasonable skill and care in the performance of their duties, causing loss in the form of redress payments, FOS fees and potentially costs that were not too remote from the credit lenders’ breaches.
Santander has indicated that it seeks to appeal the judgment.
Comment
This judgment is a timely reminder that the payment of customer compensation may only be the first step in determining interested parties’ respective liabilities and contributions. PPI, like motor finance, was sold over decades under changing regulatory requirements. PPI and motor finance are, of course, fundamentally different products. PPI was (or at least should have been) an optional add-on, whereas motor finance is in most cases an essential element to the purchase without which the sale could not go ahead. However, the financial implications of both products are estimated to be in the tens of billions, with many of the same lenders impacted. This case serves as a warning that if the Court of Appeal decision against motor finance lenders is upheld or largely upheld by the Supreme Court on Friday, the Chancellor does not intervene, and the FCA responds accordingly, the resolution of customer complaints may only be the first step. Satellite litigation between the lenders and brokers, or between original and acquiring entities, including in relation to commercial and contractual arrangements, could run on for years to come.
Studying viruses means always facing new challenges. That’s part of what drew Scott Harper to the field of virology and plant pathology.
“Viruses are very simple, but complex at the same time,” said the Washington State University associate professor and director of the Clean Plant Center Northwest (CPCNW). “I like big challenges and would probably get bored studying anything else. I want to push the frontiers and solve complex problems.”
For his work fighting and preventing viruses, Harper will receive the Excellence in Regulatory Affairs & Crop Security Award from the American Phytopathological Society (APS) in August.
The award recognizes outstanding contributions to regulatory plant pathology, crop security, and trade enhancement efforts.
Scott Harper
“Scott has done invaluable work, especially in helping fight little cherry/X disease (LCD) and in revamping the Center extensively to prevent introduction of diseases on hop, tree fruit, and grapevine planting materials entering the U.S.,” said Lindsey du Toit, chair of WSU’s Department of Plant Pathology. “This award is well deserved for the significant impact he’s had on agriculture in Washington and the nation.”
Harper always had an interest in science, dating back to his boyhood in New Zealand. However, he didn’t learn about virology until he “lucked into” a graduate program and discovered his passion.
After earning a doctorate in his homeland, he moved to the University of Florida, where he worked on citrus diseases for six years. Harper came to WSU in 2017 to run the CPCNW, which is based at the WSU Irrigated Agriculture Research and Extension Center in Prosser, Washington.
The Center works closely with the agriculture industry to propagate, maintain, and distribute virus-tested fruit trees, grapevines, and hop plants from WSU facilities.
“The Clean Plant Center can be hard for growers to understand because our main goal is preventing problems before they happen,” Harper said. “We test plants from all around the world to make sure they are virus-free and don’t spread diseases. If there are no issues, then we’re doing our job.”
Harper plans to step down from his director’s role later this year so he can focus more on his research program. Since his arrival at WSU, that has mostly involved battling LCD, which results in small, unripe, unmarketable cherries.
The APS award is for the combined work he’s done at the Center and on LCD. The latter is ongoing but moving to the next phase.
“We found the cause, which was the first priority,” Harper said. “Now we’re focusing on how the disease works, so that hopefully we can learn how to disrupt the process and block LCD’s expression of causing unripe cherries.”
In addition to his work on LCD (which includes the successful ‘detecta-dog’ project), Harper plans to focus on other virus issues, specifically determining where they exist in the wild and how they come into new regions or crops. One area he wants to investigate more thoroughly is the impact of viruses on product quality, for example on hop cones. With Washington producing nearly 75% of U.S. hops, it’s research that would be especially relevant to the Pacific Northwest.
“I’m looking forward to expanding my research focus as we bring in a new Clean Plant Center director,” Harper said. “The APS award is meaningful because it’s a cumulative recognition for my work at WSU, kind of like a highlight reel. I hope to keep building upon my research and helping agriculture in Washington.”
Cape Town is the latest British Airways long-haul Avios-Only flight destination
This popular route will be made available for customers using their Avios over the festive period
Since the launch of Avios-Only flights, the airline has offered its Members 34 flights to 15 destinations
The Avios-Only flight to Cape Town marks the release of the airline’s 7,500th Avios-Only seat
British Airways has announced that the latest Avios-Only destination will be Cape Town, with more than 500 seats now available for customers to spend their Avios on. Members of The British Airways Club can travel to Cape Town over the Christmas period, from as little as 70,000 Avios and £150.
Date
Flight No.
Route
Aircraft
20 Dec 2025
BA43
London Heathrow – Cape Town
Boeing 777
02 Jan 2026
BA42
Cape Town – London Heathrow
Boeing 777
Cape Town marks the release of the airline’s 7,500th Avios-Only seat since the launch in 2023. British Airways has operated 34 Avios-Only flights to 15 destinations across Europe, Africa, the Middle East, North America, and the Caribbean. The most recent Avios-Only flights to Málaga and Marrakech were scheduled during the October half-term and were especially popular with families. Booking rates for families with children were more than four times higher than for other reward flights.
British Airways’ Chief Commercial Officer, Colm Lacy, said: “We’re delighted to announce Cape Town as our latest Avios-Only flight destination, in South Africa’s peak travel season. Members will have the opportunity to book seats across all four cabins over the popular festive period offering more value and choice than ever.”
Rob McDonald, Chief Commercial Officer at IAG Loyalty, said: “We know how popular Avios-Only flights are with customers and we’re incredibly excited to work with British Airways to offer the next long-haul Avios-Only flight to Cape Town, operating over the peak Christmas period. This will allow customers to take full advantage of the value Avios unlocks on an incredibly popular route.”
Avios-Only seats are sold as normal Reward Seats, which means that customers with British Airways American Express Credit Cards will also have the option to use their Companion Vouchers. These entitle Members to a second seat for just the taxes and charges, or one seat for half the amount of Avios.
Reward Seats are those that can be purchased using Avios at static rates. British Airways guarantees a minimum of 12 and 14 Reward Seats on standard short and long-haul flights respectively, whereas Avios-Only flights mean that every seat is available to purchase using Avios. Members booking the Avios-Only flight can do so in any cabin as they normally would through ba.com.
ENDS
About The British Airways Club
The British Airways Club is a free-to-join reward programme for anyone who loves travel. Its currency is Avios, which can be collected by flying with BA or its partner airlines, taking a holiday, making purchases with more than 2,000 retailers when shopping through British Airways at avios.com, or through everyday spending with a wide range of partners such as American Express, Nectar, Avis Budget Group and Marriott.
Members can also collect tier points every time they fly with British Airways or its oneworld® partners, which offer access to a range of exclusive benefits as they climb the tiers through Blue, Bronze, Silver and Gold. As of 1 April 2025, Members will also collect tier points on ancillary spend, co-brand credit card spend and contributions to sustainable aviation fuel. For more information, visit www.ba.com/theclub
About IAG Loyalty
IAG Loyalty is a pioneer in the loyalty industry with over 30 years of experience. It’s home to British Airways Holidays and Avios – the loyalty currency of British Airways, Iberia, Aer Lingus, Vueling, Qatar Airways, Finnair and Loganair. With a vision to create the world’s most rewarding experiences, IAG Loyalty enables more than 69 million members worldwide to collect and redeem Avios through a diverse range of partners spanning retail, travel and financial services. Its parent company, International Airlines Group (IAG), is one of the world’s largest airline groups with 600+ aircraft carrying more than 122 million customers to 260 destinations across 91 countries each year. For more information, visit www.iagloyalty.com.
