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

“LexisNexis is great as I can find the answers I am looking for really quickly. I believe that nothing should be more than 6 clicks away - and the products from LexisNexis deliver on this standard”

Avensure

Access all documents on c

c meaning

What does c mean?
remoteness (of damage) describes the limit on recoverable loss in damages: only consequences of a breach of contract or a tort/delict that were reasonably foreseeable are compensable. It is defined by case law. In contract, the Hadley v Baxendale test, refined in Victoria Laundry and The Heron II, permits recovery for losses arising naturally or within the reasonable contemplation of both parties when contracting, including unusual losses if the promisor knew or ought to have known of the relevant special circumstances. In tort/delict, per The Wagon Mound (No 1), a claimant recovers for damage of a kind that was reasonably foreseeable; the precise manner or extent need not be foreseeable (thin skull rule), though a novus actus interveniens may break causation. Across England & Wales and Northern Ireland these principles apply. Scots law adopts an equivalent foreseeability approach in delict (e.g. Allan v Barclay; Simmons v British Steel). Irish law is broadly consistent, applying Hadley in contract and Wagon Mound foreseeability in tort. Practically, remoteness filters liability, informs contractual risk allocation and notice of unusual risks, and frames pleading and evidential strategy.
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 Checklists about c

CHECKLISTS
Provider Selection Regime 2023: Checklist for Notice of Intention to Award to an Existing Provider using Direct Award Process C (health care services), for UK central digital platform submission

This Checklist This Checklist explains the particulars that must appear in a notice to be submitted to the UK central digital platform to satisfy the applicable transparency duties imposed by the Health Care Services (Provider Selection Regime) Regulations 2023 (PSR Regs 2023), SI 2023/1348, reg 9(4), Sch 3, following the direct award made of a health care contract under Direct Award Process C...

Read More Right Arrow
CHECKLISTS
Corporate criminal investigations: defence checklist for interviews under caution—advice, attendance and follow-up (England and Wales)

This Checklist outlines the matters defence practitioners may wish to weigh up when guiding a corporate client about attending an interview under caution arising from suspected corporate criminal conduct in England and Wales. It should be considered alongside the Practice Notes: Interview under caution and Voluntary attendance at an interview under caution. Advising clients before an interview under caution When a corporate client is asked to attend an interview under caution: Make sure the client grasps what an interview under caution involves and the significance of the caution. Confirm the client appreciates their rights before and during any interview under caution under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE 1984) and PACE Code C. Explain what to expect at the interview under caution and the procedural steps the interviewing officer must take to meet PACE Code C. If the client forms part of a corporate group, verify the request for interview has been addressed to the correct legal entity...

Read More Right Arrow
CHECKLISTS
Fixed recoverable costs for RTA portal and ex‑portal claims: CPR 45 checklist (fast/intermediate track; pre/post 1 Oct 2023; Apr 2024 uprating)—England and Wales

Note: As of 1 October 2023, the CPR has been updated to broaden the scope of fixed recoverable costs. These changes apply where the cause of action arises on or after 1 October 2023 (typically the accident date). For the version of Part 45 that applied before 1 October 2023, see: Can more than fixed costs be recovered? London weighting A 12.5% uplift to fixed costs applies if the claimant resides or works, and the instructed solicitor practises, within one of the London areas identified in CPR 45. Other circumstances For direction on other situations where recovery beyond fixed costs may be possible, see Practice Note: Fixed costs in road traffic accident claims. Children Distinct fixed costs apply to infant approval hearings, known as Type C fixed costs. The schedule for fixed costs under the Pre-Action Protocol for Low Value Personal Injury Claims in Road Traffic Accidents (the RTA protocol) appears at Table 10 in CPR PD 45. See Practice Note: Fixed costs in...

Read More Right Arrow

View the related Flowcharts about c

FLOWCHARTS
Statutory lease extension of flats (LRHUDA 1993): tenant’s claim flowchart—s.42 and s.45, FTT/LVT and County Court deadlines, redevelopment ground (England and Wales)

This Checklist This checklist sets out key questions and considerations for local authority officers to weigh when defining the scope and content of a criminal investigation into a suspected criminal offence. What offence(s) are under investigation? Examine the statute and determine: the elements of the offence; and who may commit the offence What is the legal status of a potential defendant(s)? Is the potential defendant: a registered company? an LLP? a partnership? a sole trader? an unincorporated association? an individual?...

Read More Right Arrow
FLOWCHARTS
FIDIC 2017 Red, Yellow and Silver Books: Defects and Remedial Works Process Flowchart (Clauses 7.5, 7.6, 11.1 and 12.3)

This Flowchart explains what the requirements are for industrial action to qualify for statutory immunity under the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 (TULR(C)A 1992), as amended by the Employment Rights Act 2025 English law confers no positive entitlement to organise or take part in industrial action. As a matter of common law, such action is ordinarily unlawful. A trade union that calls industrial action will typically commit one or more of the so‑called economic or industrial torts. Individuals who join the action will frequently breach their contracts of employment. Statute nevertheless intervenes to grant a union immunity from tortious liability when organising industrial action, but that protection is bounded by substantial and intricate statutory requirements. Industrial action that satisfies those requirements is treated as protected. Where statutory immunity does not arise, or is lost, the action is unprotected. The ramifications for a union of initiating industrial action that lacks statutory immunity can be significant, with the possibility of damages being awarded against it and/or...

Read More Right Arrow
FLOWCHARTS
Industrial action statutory immunity under TULR(C)A 1992: practitioner flowchart on trade disputes, prohibited action, balloting and union liability

Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975: Applicant Classes This flowchart sets out the groups of potential claimants who can seek reasonable provision from a deceased person’s estate pursuant to the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 (I(PFD)A 1975). For each applicant type, it lists the requirements to be met and identifies matters to weigh up before commencing any claim, while signposting these points and referring the practitioner to supplementary guidance, where necessary for further guidance...

Read More Right Arrow

View the related News about c

NEWS
EU competition litigation update: Livronsa Euribor reference; General Court orders in Feralpi and Kingspan; State aid appeals on Swedish CCS auction and Madeira scheme; trackers and calendar (22 April 2025)

Antitrust The application in Case C-60/25 Livronsa has now been published, an Italian national reference asking whether national courts must regard the Euribor manipulation evidence confirmed by the Commission and the Court of Justice as conclusive, and whether the ensuing competition restriction applies only to the derivatives market or instead to all markets that use the manipulated Euribor benchmark—see also the application The General Court has recently issued an order in Case T-413/21 Feralpi v Commission, an action lodged against the Commission for failing to pay Default Interest as required by the General Court in Cases C-85/15 Feralpi v Commission...

Read More Right Arrow
NEWS
EU competition: CJEU rejects price parity clauses as ancillary; AG backs assignment of damages claims; UK CFC State aid decision annulled; Commission brief on generative AI; DMA Apple steps

Antitrust Court of Justice issues judgment in national reference from the Netherlands proposing that parity clauses are not ancillary restrictions for the purposes of EU competition law The Court of Justice has delivered its judgment in Case C- 264/23 Booking,com BV and Booking.com (Deutschland) GmbH v 25hours Hotel Company Berlin GmbH and Others, concerning a Dutch reference seeking clarification on whether wide and narrow parity clauses are ancillary restraints under Article 101(1) TFEU. The reference seeks guidance on their classification within EU competition rules under Article 101(1) of TFEU. Background Booking.com BV runs an online hotel reservation platform. Up to 2015, its agreements contained wide price parity obligations that stopped hotels from advertising cheaper room rates via their own direct channels and any other outlets, including rival online travel agencies (OTAs). Thereafter, Booking.com moved to narrow price parity undertakings, which bar hotels from offering lower prices through their direct sales channels; the Federal Court of Justice of Germany nonetheless held these also restrict competition. Booking.com and other...

Read More Right Arrow
NEWS
EU competition update: CJEU dismisses RWE/E.ON–Innogy appeals, no single concentration; AG on co-operative fine cap; GBER ruling on natural-person control; merger clearances and notifications

Mergers Court of Justice dismisses appeals by German energy utility companies regarding Commission’s decision to approve the acquisition by E.ON of the distribution and retail energy business as well as certain general assets of Innogy The Court of Justice has handed down its judgments in joined appeals C-171/24 P, C-172/24 P, C-173/24 P, C-174/24 P, C-175/24 P, C-176/24 P, C-177/24 P, C-178/24 P, and C-179/24 P, brought by German energy utilities against the Commission. These challenges targeted the General Court’s rulings that had rejected actions seeking annulment of the Commission’s decision conditionally authorising a related transaction involving E.ON and RWE’s assets. Each appeal was dismissed by the Court of Justice. The nine appeals concerned the General Court’s judgments in cases T-53/21, T-55/21, T-56/21, T-58/21, T-59/21, T-61/21, T-62/21, T-64/21, and T-53/21, which upheld the Commission’s 17 September 20219 decision conditionally clearing the acquisition by RWE of E.ON’s renewable and nuclear electricity generation assets (M.8870). The Court of Justice dismissed all nine appeals. Background RWE and E.ON are...

Read More Right Arrow

View the related Practice Notes about c

PRACTICE NOTES
Court of Justice of the European Union State aid appeals—live tracker of appeals from the General Court and recovery actions

This tracker monitors current Court of Justice appeals concerning State aid (Articles 107–109 TFEU) and other aid recovery actions. For concluded matters, consult Court of Justice State aid appeals—closed cases tracker. Note—closed appeals are transferred from this page to the closed trackers within seven days of the final ruling. For the Commission’s recent State aid decisions, see EU State aid decisions—ongoing cases tracker; for appeals pending before the General Court, see General Court State aid appeals—ongoing cases tracker; and for national references before the Court of Justice touching on State aid, see Court of Justice State aid national references—ongoing cases tracker. Appeals from the General Court Case C-306/26 P, LM v Commission — Appeal against the General Court’s order in Case T-261/25 declaring inadmissible an annulment action concerning parts of Commission decision SA.44944—Tax treatment of public casinos in Germany and SA.53552—Alleged guarantee for public casinos in Germany (Wirtschaftlichkeitsgarantie). Latest development: Lodged—07/04/2026. Case C-505/24 P, Condor Flugdienst v Ryanair —...

Read More Right Arrow
PRACTICE NOTES
Commercial Court application notices: completing forms N244(CC), N244(LCC) and N244(RCC), with key guidance on draft orders, evidence, time estimates and hearing arrangements (England and Wales)

Note From 1 January 2026, the Commercial Court and the London Commercial Court are running a pilot under CPR PD 51ZH. By default, specified materials used in public hearings—such as witness statements and skeleton arguments—will be accessible to the public. Practitioners issuing applications in these courts should acquaint themselves with the pilot and take suitable measures to safeguard clients when drafting any impacted documents. For further direction, see Practice Note: Non-party access to court documents and information in civil proceedings. This Practice Note explains how to complete an application notice using form N244(CC) for proceedings in the Commercial Court. For broader guidance on applications, refer to the following Practice Notes: How to make an application for a court order (CPR 23) Making an application in the Commercial Courts Form N244(CC) In civil proceedings, applications are ordinarily made by application notice—see Practice Note: Informal applications for when the court may allow an application without one. In most courts, the standard application...

Read More Right Arrow
PRACTICE NOTES
ISDA Master Agreements (1992/2002) and Schedules: Single Agreement, Flawed Asset, Close-out Netting, Representations, Events of Default, Termination, Tax, Undertakings, Governing Law and Jurisdiction

What does this Practice Note cover? This Practice Note outlines the principal provisions that apply to both the 1992 ISDA Master Agreement (Multicurrency—Cross Border) (the 1992 Agreement) and the 2002 ISDA Master Agreement (the 2002 Agreement), together with their accompanying schedules. Unless indicated otherwise, any reference here to the master agreements (the ISDA master agreement) should be read as a reference to both the 1992 and 2002 Agreements. For a comparison of the two forms, see Practice Note: ISDA documentation—comparison of the 1992 and 2002 master agreements; for the broader ISDA documentation framework, see Practice Note: Derivatives—ISDA documentation framework. The key concepts underpinning the ISDA master agreement The ISDA master agreement rests on three core concepts, outlined briefly below: single agreement flawed asset close-out netting Single agreement Under ISDA’s documentation architecture, every derivative transaction between a pair of counterparties is captured under one overarching agreement (implemented through multiple layers of documentation), as provided in Section 1(c) of the...

Read More Right Arrow

View the related Precedents about c

PRECEDENTS
Balanced UK supply chain compliance schedule: anti-bribery, modern slavery, failure to prevent tax evasion and fraud; policies, training, records, audit and monitoring, flow-down, breach/termination, indemnity

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...

Read More Right Arrow
PRECEDENTS
Settlement agreement precedent (Scotland) for civil court or arbitration disputes, including release, agreement not to sue, confidentiality and joint minute

This Agreement is dated [ date ] Parties [ insert name of the pursuer ], a company registered in Scotland (no [ insert company number ]), whose [ registered office OR principal place of business ] is at [ insert address ] (the Pursuer) [ and ] [ ; ] [ insert name of defender ], a company registered in Scotland (no [ insert company number ]), whose [ registered office OR principal place of business ] is at [ insert address ] (the Defender). Each being a Party and, together, the Parties. Whereas (A) [ Insert details of the background to the dispute eg ‘The Parties entered into a contract for the supply of certain goods etc ]. (B) A dispute has emerged between the Parties regarding [ insert details of the dispute ] (the Dispute). (C) [ Proceedings were raised by the Pursuer against the Defender on [ date ] by way of [ Summons OR...

Read More Right Arrow
PRECEDENTS
Precedent pro-licensor IP licence agreement (copyright, trade marks, designs, patents) with royalties and quality control—England and Wales

This Agreement is entered into on [ insert date ] Parties [ insert name ], a company incorporated in [ England and Wales ] with number [ insert company number ] and having its registered office at [ insert address ] (Licensor); and [ insert name ], a company incorporated in [ England and Wales ] with number [ insert company number ], whose registered office is at [ insert address ] (Licensee). Each of the Licensor and the Licensee is a party, and together the Licensor and the Licensee are the parties. BACKGROUND (A) The Licensor [ is the [ registered ] proprietor of OR is the applicant to register OR has the right to licence and/or sub-licence ] certain intellectual property rights. (B) The Licensee is [ insert background to licence/relevant transaction ]. (C) The Licensor has agreed to grant a licence of those intellectual property rights to the Licensee, and the Licensee has...

Read More Right Arrow

View the related Q&As about c

Q&As
Tenancy deposit claim if prescribed information names agent, not landlord — 2007 Order para 2(g)(iii)

Section 213 of the Housing Act 2004 (HA 2004) sets out the obligations on landlords who take a deposit in relation to an assured shorthold tenancy. Every deposit must be handled in line with an authorised scheme (HA 2004, s 213(1)), and the scheme’s initial requirements must be met within a period of 30 days from receipt of the deposit (HA 2004, s 213(3))...

Read More Right Arrow
Q&As
Commercial lease surrender: s.17 notice re guarantor no assignment?

Section 17 of the Landlord and Tenant (Covenants) Act 1995 (LT(C)A 1995) provides that: (1) This provision applies where a person (“the former tenant”) has, as a consequence of an assignment, ceased to be the tenant under a tenancy, but either: namely that (a) in the context of a new tenancy, has, under an authorised guarantee agreement, guaranteed his assignee’s performance of a tenant covenant of that tenancy under which any fixed charge is payable; or (b) in relation to any tenancy, still remains obliged by that covenant under that tenancy, notwithstanding assignment...

Read More Right Arrow
Q&As
Tenants in common, Form A: sale after co-owner’s death, no grant

Joint property ownership in England and Wales When property is owned jointly in England and Wales, it is held in two ways. The legal title shows the names under which the property is registered. Those legal owners hold it on trust for the beneficial owners (also called equitable owners). Beneficial owners are often the same as the legal owners, but need not be. Legal title is always held as joint tenants. Accordingly, the registered owners hold the property ‘per muy et per tout’: each owns the entirety rather than fixed shares...

Read More Right Arrow