ACT meaning

Individuals or entities that may be entered onto a PSC register: registrable individuals holding significant control registrable relevant legal entities subject to their own disclosure requirements: all UK companies limited by shares or by guarantee (including community interest companies (CICs)) and dormant companies UK unlimited companies UK limited liability partnerships (LLPs) unregistered companies subject to the Unregistered Companies Regulations 2009 (including some Royal Chartered bodies, such as City of London Livery Companies, Guilds and other societies and professional bodies) UK Societas...

Section 57 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (TCPA 1990) requires planning consent for any material change in the use of buildings or land. Any limitations or conditions attached to a permission must likewise be adhered to. Liability for any existing breach will transfer to the purchaser. It is therefore essential to verify that the current use of the entire property is properly authorised and that all related conditions are being complied with, or to establish whether any unauthorised use or breach has become immune from enforcement. For further information, see Practice Note: Material change of use. Is the use authorised? Confirm the permitted use of the property, or, where relevant, each planning unit, and determine whether that use is authorised by: an explicit planning permission a certificate of lawful use, or permitted development rights If the permitted use does not mirror an express planning permission, do not assume it is unlawful; it may still be authorised by...

The Investigatory Powers Act 2016 (IPA 2016) revamped the legal regime regulating covert surveillance by public authorities. IPA 2016 superseded large parts of the framework previously, though not solely, contained in the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA 2000). See Practice Note: The regulation of intelligence gathering—an introductory guide. This note outlines the offences introduced by IPA 2016. For details of general sentencing limits in a magistrates’ court, see Practice Note: Sentences imposed following conviction—General limits on magistrates’ courts powers to impose custodial sentences following conviction... Section Offence Statutory defence Maximum sentence IPA 2016, s 3 — Unlawful interception: a person, by conduct in the UK, deliberately intercepts a communication during its transmission without lawful authority. Defence: where the individual has the right to control the operation or use of the system, or had that person’s express or implied consent to carry out the interception. Maximum sentence: on summary conviction, a fine; on indictment, up to two years’ imprisonment and/or a...

The following flowchart Outlines the principal stages of estate administration, beginning with initial contact from a personal representative or a relative of the deceased, proceeding to the submission for a grant of representation, and concluding with the finalisation and closure of the matter within the file itself...

In Scotland, minor offences are pursued via a summary complaint. The summary process is governed by Part IX of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995...

STOP PRESS: This document is currently being updated to take account of the full implementation of the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025 (DUAA 2025), which amends both the UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018. For further guidance on the compliance consequences of DUAA 2025, see Practice Note: Data (Use and Access) Act 2025—compliance implications. The UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR) grants data subjects several rights, including, among others: access to their personal data rectification erasure restriction of processing data portability a right of data subjects Individuals may ask an organisation at any time of their choosing to exercise one or more of these rights, and strict time limits and deadlines apply to responding to such requests promptly. See Practice Note: How to handle data subject requests. This Flowchart sets out a process for dealing with data subject requests made under the UK GDPR and reflects the requirements in the UK GDPR together...

Antitrust Court of Justice dismisses appeal relating to the calculation of the fine in the pre-stressing cartel case The Court of Justice has delivered its ruling in Case C-70/23, Westfälische Drahtindustrie and Others v Commission, on an appeal brought against the General Court’s judgment in Case T-275/20. That judgment had rejected an action seeking annulment of the Commission’s decision of 30 June 2010, as later amended on 30 September 2010, in the pre-steel cartel matter (AT.38344) (the Commission’s 2010 decision). In 2010, the Commission imposed fines on Westfälische Drahtindustrie GmbH (WDI) and Westfälische Drahtindustrie Verwaltungsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG (WDV), holding WDI jointly and severally liable with WDV and Pampus, for their participation in a cartel covering the supply of pre-stressing steel. On 15 July 2015, the General Court dismissed an appeal against the Commission’s 2010 decision (the General Court’s 2015 judgment). While it considered that the Commission had erred in its assessment of arguments on ability to pay, the General Court, exercising its unlimited jurisdiction, concluded...

The Commission is considering changes to how products regulated under EU sectoral product safety laws are covered by the EU’s AI law As part of a broader effort to streamline digital rules, MLex has learned that the Commission is weighing revisions to the AI law’s treatment of goods already subject to EU sectoral product safety regimes. The potential adjustment, being worked into the Commission’s planned digital ‘omnibus’ package due on 19 November 2025, may reduce compliance obligations for areas such as medical devices and industrial machinery. The EU’s AI Act sets a rigorous due diligence framework for AI systems that present significant risks to people’s health and fundamental rights...

Bayerische Landesbank and another v Ruschemalliance LLC [2024] EWHC 1822 (Comm) What are the practical implications of this case? In keeping with comparable determinations, this judgment succinctly sets out the jurisdictional thresholds and principal considerations the court applies when evaluating applications for anti‑suit injunctions. It underscores the judiciary’s practical bent and operates as a constructive illustration of inter‑court co‑ordination, projecting a clear signal where numerous contests flow from identical underlying events, even though such matters are dealt with at varying moments and tiers of the court structure. In sum, the outcome reasserts the English courts’ steadfast commitment to upholding arbitration, including in circumstances where the arbitral seat is situated in a foreign state. What was the background? In 2021, the defendant, Ruschemalliance LLC (“RCA”), a Russian entity, entered into two Engineering, Procurement and Construction agreements for the development of liquefied natural gas and gas processing plant facilities in Russia. The obligations owed by RCA’s counterparties, the German companies Linde GmbH and Renaissance Heavy Industries LLC (together,...

For many years, virtually every disagreement about agricultural tenancies was sent to arbitration at the outset. The rationale was that questions concerning agricultural holdings often have a strong practical dimension, so arbitration was thought a more suitable forum than the courts. This reflected the earlier assumption that practical considerations predominated in such cases, making a court reference less apt back then. Over time, however, matters of considerable legal intricacy also came before arbitrators. With the enactment of the Agricultural Holdings (Scotland) Act 2003 (AH(S)A 2003), policy shifted, and the main route for resolving disputes about agricultural tenant issues is now referral to the Scottish Land Court. At the same time, arbitration procedures were streamlined, and alternative processes, eg mediation, were enabled. Although the Agricultural Holdings (Scotland) Act 1991 (AH(S)A 1991) still sets out distinct mechanisms for dispute resolution, AH(S)A 2003 has substantially reshaped them, so that the arrangements for resolving disputes under 1991 Act Tenancies are, in large part, aligned with those for 2003 Act Tenancies...

Proving the identity of the driver Where the bench is satisfied the defendant was served with a notice under section 172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, and the court receives a statement from the defendant admitting they were the driver, that statement is accepted as proof of identity. If no such admission exists—either because a RTA 1988, s 172 notice was not properly served in line with the Criminal Procedure Rules 2025 (CrimPR 2025), SI 2025/909, Pt 4, or the allegation is not one to which section 172 applies—the magistrates will look to other material. Information provided by the registered keeper to police during interview or questioning Entries held on the police national database See: Creed v Scott [1976] RTR 485 (not reported by LexisNexis®) and DPP v Bayliff [2003] EWHC 539 (Admin) (not reported by LexisNexis®). Details supplied to the police may suffice to prove who was driving; it is immaterial whether a driving licence is produced to confirm name...

This Practice Note centres on appeals against conviction, sentence, and related orders pursued in the Court of Appeal Criminal Division (CACD) under the Criminal Appeal Act 1968 (CAA 1968), and in accordance with the Criminal Procedure Rules 2025 (CrimPR 2025), SI 2025/909, Parts 36 and 39. It also considers applications advanced by the Attorney General under section 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1972 (CJA 1972) or section 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 (CJA 1988). It outlines how an appeal is commenced, namely by lodging an application for leave to appeal directly with the Court of Appeal. For further information on obtaining certificates declaring a case fit for appeal from the Crown Court, see Practice Note: Criminal appeals—certificates of fitness to appeal from the Crown Court. For detailed guidance on progressing an appeal in the CACD, see Practice Note: Conducting an appeal in the Court of Appeal Criminal Division (CACD). When can an appeal be made to the Court of Appeal? An appeal to the CACD...

The Schedule 1 Definitions 1.1 In this Schedule: Adequate Procedures – must be interpreted in line with BA 2010 and any guidance issued under it; Associated Person – means any or all of: (a) the officers, employees, agents, subcontractors, subsidiaries, and individuals Associated With a party (Associates); and (b) persons Associated With any of those Associates, in every instance engaged in carrying out services for, or on behalf of, that party, the Services, and/or this Agreement; and Associated With – where used: (a) in paragraph 2 and in relation to bribery, is to be construed in accordance with BA 2010 and guidance issued under it; (b) in paragraph 4 and regarding the facilitation of tax evasion, is to be construed in accordance with Part 3 of CFA 2017 and guidance issued under it; (c) in paragraph 5 and as regards fraud, is to be construed in accordance with Part 5 of ECCTA 2023 and guidance issued under it; BA 2010 – means the...

INSOLVENCY ACT APPLICATION NOTICE Case No: [ insert case number ]. Court: High Court (Business and Property Courts, Insolvency and Companies List (ChD)) OR Business and Property Courts in [ insert location ] OR County Court at [ insert location ] (Business and Property Work). In the matter of [ insert company’s name ] and the Insolvency Act 1986. Parties: [ Insert Applicant(s) ] v [ Insert Respondent(s) ]. Under IR 2016 r 18.23. Parties and addresses: Applicants [ names/addresses ]; Respondents [ names/addresses ]. Application relates to [ details ]. Judge: [ level ]. Venue: [ court/hearing centre ]. Ref: [ number ]. Orders sought: Fix remuneration at £[ insert sum ] plus VAT; disbursements £[ insert sum ]. Costs to be an expense of the [ liquidation/administration ]. Any further order or relief the court considers appropriate. Grounds: witness statement of [ name ], dated [ date ]. Service/notice: [ names/addresses, if any, or none ]. Address for...

Brief details of claim This action is brought under section 423 of the Insolvency Act 1986. The Claimant is the [ insert office held ] at [ insert name of the company ] (the Company). ...

Duty to make reasonable adjustments The Equality Act 2010 (EqA 2010) establishes a duty to make reasonable adjustments (referred to below as ‘the duty’), which contains three distinct requirements. The third requires that, where a disabled person would, without the provision of an auxiliary aid, face a substantial disadvantage in relation to a relevant matter when compared with people who are not disabled, such steps as are reasonable must be taken to supply the auxiliary aid. The situations in which the duty arises differ across workplace settings. Accordingly, the precise circumstances that engage the duty will not be uniform across all settings. For all three requirements, the duty is triggered only where a disabled individual is placed at a substantial disadvantage compared with non‑disabled people ‘in relation to a “relevant matter”’, and what counts as a ‘relevant matter’ (as defined in EqA 2010, Sch 8 Pt 1) varies according to the particular type of workplace. As a result, application of the duty is context‑specific to the workplace in question....

In any specific context, a controller handling personal data or information must assess if the processing activity complies with what is now the applicable Assimilated Regulation (EU) 2016/679, the UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR), and the Data Protection Act 2018 (DPA 2018)...

For the purposes of the Gambling Act 2005 (GA 2005) Under GA 2005, s 3, gambling encompasses ‘gaming’, ‘betting’ and taking part in a ‘lottery’. ‘Gaming’ is defined in GA 2005, s 6 as playing a game of chance for a prize under that provision. A game of chance covers the following: a game that contains both an element of chance and an element of skill, a game where the element of chance can be eliminated by superlative skill, and a game presented as involving an element of chance, but it does not include a sport. There must be some element of chance and the prospect of winning a ‘prize’ for the activity to qualify. The Q&A does not indicate the setting in which the mystery box of prizes is being offered to participants. If the prize is to be obtained by taking part in a game of chance as described in GA 2005, s 6, it will fall within the...