Consent mechanism meaning

This checklist highlights the principal matters to review when a new individual joins a limited liability partnership (LLP), covering legal, regulatory and practical considerations. Identity of new member Full name and residential or registered address of the incoming member? Confirm the individual is not an undischarged bankrupt and is not prohibited from acting as an LLP member or as a company director. Check whether any current agreements or restrictive covenants (eg employment, LLP, joint venture, finance documents) could limit their ability to join or commit to the LLP. LLP agreement and other documentation What mechanism in the current LLP agreement governs the admission of new members? Will a deed of adherence/accession be required? Are any amendments needed to the terms of the existing LLP agreement? Do any related contracts require variation or consent, eg leases and IP licences?...

In this issue New technologies Internet Data protection Advertising, marketing and sponsorship Reputation management Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Useful information New technologies Private lawsuits to police EU bans on unacceptable AI for first six months MLex reports that the EU has adopted the EU AI Act, a sweeping framework that governs artificial intelligence according to potential harm. One major category captures unacceptable uses, which are outlawed across the EU. These prohibitions come into force on 2 February 2025, while public enforcement will not commence until August 2025, leaving initial compliance to be tested through private litigation. See: EU’s bans on unacceptable AI uses will be left to private enforcement for first six months. Tech companies urged to obtain consent before using works to train AI systems The Society of Authors (SoA) has written to leading technology companies, including Microsoft, Meta and...

In this issue: UK, EU and international regulators and bodies Regulated activities Authorisation, approval and supervision Prudential requirements Operational resilience Financial crime and sanctions Complaints, compensation and claims management Investigations, enforcement and discipline Regulation of capital markets Packaged Retail and Insurance-based Investment Products (PRIIPs) Regulation of derivatives Sustainable finance and ESG Banks and mutuals Investment funds and asset management UK MiFID II Consumer credit, mortgage and home finance Regulation of insurance Payment services and systems Regulation of AI in FS Financial Services Enforcement Database Daily and weekly news alerts Intraday news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary UK, EU and international regulators and bodies Chancellor delivers first Mansion House speech Rachel Reeves, the chancellor of the exchequer, outlined proposals to pare back certain rules brought in after the 2008 financial crisis, aiming to channel more investment...

Arun District Council—BEW Parcel SC1, Barnham On 21 July 2025, Arun District Council resolved to approve planning consent for a new scheme comprising 1,250 dwellings (with related infrastructure) in Barnham. The proposal put forward 15% affordable housing alongside reduced education contributions, both justified on viability grounds. Under the Council’s Local Plan, major sites are expected to deliver 30% affordable housing. At the time, the authority’s housing land supply stood at 3.4 years. The Officer’s Report concluded that this shortfall rendered the Local Plan out of date for decision‑making, and, in that context, recommended approval. That approval was made conditional on a satisfactory Section 106 agreement, with the Council depending on the inclusion of an upwards‑only review clause. This mechanism secured continuing reassessment of the affordable housing provision over the course of delivery and, where viability improved in future, required the developer to increase its affordable housing contribution accordingly. In practice, local planning authorities are increasingly relying on such viability review clauses within Section 106 agreements to address shortfalls in...

A deadlock arises when parties to an agreement face an irreconcilable dispute and cannot reach consensus. The expression is commonly associated with corporate joint ventures (JVs), especially 50:50 JVs where neither side holds a controlling interest and, as a result, unanimous consent is required for all decisions. Deadlock may equally occur in non-50:50 JVs, for example where specific matters demand unanimity or where more than two JV participants vote and no majority is achieved. Certain conflicts can trigger a deadlock that prevents the joint venture company (JVC) from operating effectively. It is sensible to address at the outset how a deadlock might be settled. Consequently, joint venture agreements (JVAs) usually include deadlock resolution mechanisms (often in stepped stages) that must be followed to resolve the impasse. Defining deadlock procedures within the JVA will save time and expense if a deadlock emerges and will help the parties to maintain the JV's continuity. On occasion, the very circumstances that produce a deadlock can also prompt the aggrieved party to seek relief under...

Planning gain or betterment taxation Planning gain, often called betterment taxation, has been a fixture of England’s planning regime for many years. The principle is that developers should help meet the costs arising from the effects of their schemes, and/or pay a levy on part of the uplift in land value created by securing planning permission, to finance infrastructure needed locally by the development. Numerous efforts to implement betterment taxation have been tried over time. The most durable and effective mechanism is the agreement made under section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (TCPA 1990), commonly known as a section 106 agreement or planning obligation. Section 106 of the TCPA 1990 permits local planning authorities (LPAs) to obtain both monetary and in-kind contributions from developers when issuing planning consent, so that a proposal is acceptable in planning terms. As section 106 obligations are settled case by case between the LPA and the developer or landowner, they deliver mitigation tailored to the site and tackle local...

This Practice Note examines the powers contained in sections 339ZH–339ZK of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA 2002), pursuant to which the National Crime Agency (NCA) can obtain information orders against any person in the regulated sector who has filed a suspicious activity report (SAR). For wider guidance on SARs in general, see the Practice Notes: Authorised disclosure, protected disclosure and appropriate consent, and Reporting suspicions of money laundering and terrorist financing. Background Information orders were introduced for both legal and practical reasons. Within its action plan for anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist finance, the government initially proposed legislation granting the NCA authority to require reporters to supply SAR-related information where necessary to meet the requirements of The Fourth Money Laundering Directive 2015/849/EU (MLD4). Following lengthy and noteworthy negotiations, the Council of the EU (the Council) formally adopted MLD4 in May 2015. All Member States were required to transpose MLD4 into domestic law by 26 June 2017. For additional detail, see Practice Note: Money Laundering Regulations 2017 (MLRs)—essentials...