<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><feed><author name="Rushab Aggarwal"><item><title>Limitation under Insolvency &amp;#038; Bankruptcy Code: A tale of two judgements?</title><link>https://latest.thedailyguardian.com/legally-speaking/limitation-under-insolvency-bankruptcy-code-a-tale-of-two-judgements/</link><pubDate>October 13, 2020, 4:47 am</pubDate><category>Legally Speaking</category><excerpt>“…It was the best of times, it was the worst of times….” (Charles Dickens, a Tale of Two Cities, 1859) The Insolvency &amp;amp; Bankruptcy Code (IBC) was projected and portrayed as a mirage and a revolution in the law governing reorganisation and liqu...</excerpt></item><item><title>Are tortious interference suits antithetical to free market competition?</title><link>https://latest.thedailyguardian.com/legally-speaking/are-tortious-interference-suits-antithetical-to-free-market-competition/</link><pubDate>August 4, 2020, 5:53 am</pubDate><category>Legally Speaking</category><excerpt>Existence of a contract is an essential concomitant for this tort to have occasioned. The act of wrongfully inducing a person not to enter into a contract does not amount to tortious interference.</excerpt></item></author></feed>