Powered by Lexis+®
Jurisdiction(s):
United Kingdom
CASE STUDY

“I'm able to do more in the day, which means I'm providing more value to my clients - and it's helped my margins in terms of how much I can bill. LexisNexis is helping me make money.”

ParrisWhittaker

Access all documents on ATP

ATP meaning

Published by a LexisNexis Energy expert
What does ATP mean?
ATP (authorisation to Proceed, sometimes Authority to Proceed) describes a written, conditional go‑ahead to begin specified activities before full regulatory approval or formal accreditation is completed. In Great Britain’s civil nuclear sector, the Office for Nuclear Regulation (onr) may issue an ATP within its permissioning approach to allow limited work to progress (for example pending security or safety accreditation), subject to defined scope and conditions. It is not a statutory licence instrument and is not defined in legislation; it is an administrative assurance and does not replace any consent, approval or agreement required under nuclear site licence conditions or the Nuclear Industries Security Regulations 2003. Key features typically include: a narrowly defined scope, pre‑requisites, spend or activity caps, time limits, express conditions, revocability and “at risk” reliance by the dutyholder. Breach of applicable regulatory requirements remains a compliance risk notwithstanding an ATP. Outside ONR, ATP commonly appears in project governance and procurement as a contractual mechanism to permit limited mobilisation, design or early works before full notice to proceed or contract award, usually with capped liability. Usage is broadly consistent across England & Wales and Scotland. In Northern Ireland and Ireland, ATP is mainly a contractual governance term, as ONR has no...
Speed up all aspects of your legal work with tools that help you to work faster and smarter. Win cases, close deals and grow your business–all whilst saving time and reducing risk.

View the related News about ATP

NEWS
Players and PTPA oppose ATP/WTA bids to dismiss and compel arbitration in US antitrust class action alleging cartel behaviour

International tennis authorities are, say the PTPA and the players, improperly seeking to scuttle the proposed antitrust class action by moving to drop the players’ co-plaintiff, the Professional Tennis Players Association (PTPA), and by pressing the court to consign the matter to arbitration. Those arguments appear in two briefs filed on 28 August 2025 by the PTPA and the players. The case was initially brought on 18 March by six men and six women players, with the PTPA later joining; the union, established in 2019, counts as co-founder and lead plaintiff the Canadian tennis veteran Vasek Pospisil. An amended complaint dated 24 June lists as co-defendants the Association of Tennis Professionals’ ATP Tour Inc and the Women’s Tennis Association’s WTA Tour Inc. On 31 July, the ATP and WTA tours asked the court to dismiss the union from the claim, asserting that the PTPA has no valid legal stake and characterising the union as 'a self-proclaimed advocacy group that competes neither on the tennis court nor in the alleged relevant...

Read More Right Arrow
NEWS
UK Insurance & Reinsurance Weekly: AerCap stranded jets trial; COVID-19 BI 'at the premises' appeal; UK/EU regulatory updates, key dates and guidance for 10 October 2024

Insurance & Reinsurance weekly highlights—10 October 2024 In this issue: Ukraine conflict Coronavirus (COVID-19) business interruption insurance Cases and decisions UK Regulation EU Regulation New and updated content Case trackers Key dates Daily and weekly news alerts LexTalk®Insurance: a Lexis®Nexis community Ukraine conflict Aviation claims (AerCap Ireland Ltd v AIG Europe S.A. and another) — counsel for leading lessor AerCap told the High Court on 2 October 2024 that there is ‘no room’ for major insurers to decline billion-dollar claims concerning aircraft taken by Russian airlines, as the opening day of a trial expected to serve as a test case for further claims. See News Analysis: AerCap battles insurers over stranded jets as trial begins — at the 3 October 2024 hearing, a cohort of aviation insurers argued that directions from Russian President Vladimir Putin, a political act following sanctions, stopped hundreds of Western-owned planes being returned to their lessors. See News Analysis:...

Read More Right Arrow

View the related Practice Notes about ATP

PRACTICE NOTES
UK CFC rules: Chapter 4 UK activities gateway—application steps, OECD attribution, step 6 minority-activity exclusion, and step 8 safe-harbours (net economic value, independent companies' arrangements, trading profits)

This Practice Note addresses the UK activities gateway and safe-harbour under the controlled foreign company (CFC) regime. As set out in the meaning of gateways, a CFC tax charge applies solely where profits are routed through the CFC charge gateway. A CFC’s assumed total profits (ATP) reach the CFC charge gateway only where they first pass the chapter 3 gateway and/or one of the gateways in chapters 4–8 of Part 9A of the Taxation (International and Other Provisions) Act 2010 (TIOPA 2010). When does the chapter 4 UK activities gateway need to be considered?...

Read More Right Arrow
PRACTICE NOTES
CJEU: Cañas v Commission—continuing interest to act required; retirement defeats standing to challenge rejection of anti-doping competition complaint (Case C-269/12 P)

CASE HUB ARCHIVED This archived case hub records the position as at the judgment dated 20 June 2013; it is not updated. For more, see: timeline, commentary and related/relevant cases. Case facts Outline An appeal by Guillermo Cañas challenged the General Court’s ruling dismissing his action seeking annulment of the Commission decision of 12 October 2009, which had declined his complaint for lack of sufficient Community interest. The complaint alleged breaches of Articles 81 EC and 82 EC by the World Anti-Doping Agency, Association of Tennis Professionals Tour Inc, and the International Council of Arbitration for Sport (ICAS). On 20 June 2013, the Court of Justice rejected the appeal in full. The dispute centres on whether an applicant for annulment of a Commission decision possesses, and retains, a legally relevant interest in the outcome of the proceedings. Parties Appellant: Guillermo Cañas (Mr Cañas) Other parties: European Commission; World Anti-Doping Agency; Association of Tennis Professionals Tour Inc (ATP) Cañas...

Read More Right Arrow
PRACTICE NOTES
UK CFC regime: Chapter 6 trading finance gateway—application, excess free capital/assets computations, profit attribution, banking/insurance exclusions, and qualifying loan relationship adjustments

This Practice Note considers the chapter 6 trading finance gateway within the controlled foreign company (CFC) regime. As outlined in Practice Note: CFC rules—initial chapter 3 gateway—Meaning of gateways, a CFC tax charge arises only where profits pass into the CFC charge gateway. A CFC’s assumed total profits (ATP) will enter the CFC charge gateway only if they fall within the initial chapter 3 gateway and/or any of the gateways set out in chapters 4–8 of Part 9A of the Taxation (International and Other Provisions) Act 2010 (TIOPA 2010)... When does the chapter 6 trading finance gateway need to be considered?

Read More Right Arrow