D&B meaning

Evidence of bad character Specify the impugned bad character material. Check: whether the evidence of bad character falls within the meaning of 'bad character' in section 98 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (CJA 2003) Outline the grounds said to justify refusing admission. Identify: the statutory gateway(s) in dispute any other basis for exclusion, eg unfairness under section 78 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE 1984) and/or CJA 2003, s 101(3) (exclusion under gateway 101(1)(d) (propensity) or s 101(1)(g) (attack on another person's character)) or s 103(3) (unjust to admit convictions by reason of the age of the conviction) why the evidence is not relevant Address each ground of objection in order, by reference to the appropriate statutory gateway(s) (CJA 2003, ss 102–106). See Practice Notes: Admissibility of defendant's bad character in criminal proceedings and Admissibility of bad character as...

Annual long-form L&D planning workflow—medium to large firms The graphic beneath outlines essential phases for planning your L&D resourcing...

This Checklist highlights the key matters to consider when preparing new Research and Development (R&D) agreements, or revising existing R&D agreements, to determine whether they fall within the block exemption available under the Competition Act 1998 (Research and Development Agreements Block Exemption) Order 2022 (UK R&D BEO), SI 2022/1271. It is not a full guide to the UK R&D BEO, but is intended for situations where a commercial lawyer wishes to be confident that an R&D agreement sits within the UK R&D BEO and aligns with the CMA Guidance on Horizontal Agreements (2023 Horizontal Guidance). Introduction to the UK R&D BEO Any agreement that influences trade or restricts competition in the UK may fall under the prohibition on anti-competitive agreements in Chapter I of the Competition Act 1998 (CA 1998) (the Chapter I prohibition)...

Loss and expense claims in JCT D&B 2011—flowchart [Archived] ARCHIVED: This flowchart is now retired and no longer supported. Click here to obtain a PDF copy...

This diagram outlines the standard lifecycle of a medicinal product...

AMR represents a mounting global public health threat, with some analyses attributing up to five million deaths each year. It is therefore unequivocally a core ESG priority for life sciences. In a year poised to be pivotal for coordinated action—underscored by its profile at the UN High Level Meeting in September 2023—the government has set out firm pledges. It has released the Second 5 year AMR National Action Plan for 2024–2029 (the Action Plan) (see: LNB News 08/05/2024 25), designed to advance the UK’s 20 year vision to contain AMR by 2040 and acting as a key strand of the UK’s recently revised Biosecurity Strategy. The Action Plan frames commitments across four pillars: cutting the need for, and unintended exposure to, antimicrobials; optimising antimicrobial use; driving innovation, and ensuring supply and access; acting as a responsible global partner. We highlight below ESG developments pertinent to life sciences. Market failures The Action Plan prioritises boosting R&D and remedying entrenched market...

In this issue Working time and flexible working Pay Tax Prohibited conduct (discrimination etc) Employment tribunal equality claims Diversity and gender pay gap Industrial action Unfair dismissal Employment tribunals Immigration Northern Ireland ESG and sustainability: employment issues Daily and weekly news alerts Dates for your diary Trackers New Q&As Working time and flexible working Code of Practice (Requests for Flexible Working) Order 2024 (SI 2024/429): The Order designates 6 April 2024 as the date on which the updated Code of Practice on handling requests for flexible working, issued by the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (Acas) under section 199 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 (TULR(C)A 1992), takes effect. It also clarifies that the revised Code does not cover applications for flexible working made under section 80F of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA 1996) that are lodged on or before 5 April 2024;...

In this issue: Employment contract Horizon scanning Pensions Tax Prohibited conduct (discrimination etc) Data protection and employee information Dates for your diary Trackers New Q&As Employment resources on Lexis+® Daily and weekly news alerts Employment contract Supreme Court reinstates High Court injunction preventing Tesco from ‘firing and rehiring’ employees on less favourable terms. In Tesco Stores Ltd v Union of Shop, Distributive and Allied Workers (USDAW) [2024] UKSC 28, the Supreme Court, unanimously and led by Lord Burrows and Lady Simler, upheld the High Court’s stance, reviving the injunction that bars Tesco from dismissing staff in order to strip them of a ‘permanent’ contractual entitlement to retained pay, then proposing re‑engagement without it. An implied term in the contracts curtailed Tesco’s ability to rely on dismissal rights for that end. Commentary on the ruling is provided by Neil Todd of Thompsons Solicitors; Jonathan Chamberlain and Connie Cliff of Gowling WLG; Philip Harman...

Allocation of jurisdiction within the UK under the CJJA 1982 This Practice Note explores how jurisdiction is apportioned across the UK under the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982 (CJJA 1982). It examines the scope of that regime and the conditions that must be satisfied for it to apply, and considers its interaction with Regulation 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast) (the Regulation). It sets out the primary rule together with the departures from it, and, lastly, addresses forum non conveniens in this setting. The CJJA’s intra-UK jurisdiction framework is designed to furnish rules allocating jurisdiction inside the UK itself. Distinct rules and factors arise when assessing whether UK courts possess jurisdiction over a claim that contains an international dimension. The UK comprises four countries, yet there are only three legal jurisdictions, and CJJA 1982, s 50, describes each as ‘parts of the UK’. England and Wales Scotland Northern Ireland Practitioners in England engaged in cross-border disputes must be cognisant of a range...

The Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 (HSWA 1974) sets out broad duties to protect the health and safety of employees and others affected by work. Not complying with these duties is a criminal offence, prosecutable in either the magistrates’ court or the Crown Court. For details of the duties under HSWA 1974, ss 2–7, see the following Practice Notes: Failure to carry out health and safety duties under HSWA 1974—offences Safety and the risk to safety under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 Employees' duties to take reasonable care for health and safety at work Directors’ duties for health and safety Health and safety law and the self-employed This Practice Note highlights those HSWA 1974 offences that can only be tried in the magistrates’ courts. Summary only health and safety offences The health and safety offences that are triable only in the magistrates’ court are: Breach of provisions relating...

The UK’s rules on hybrid and other mismatches Since 1 January 2017, the UK’s hybrid and other mismatch rules (described in this Practice Note as the hybrid rules) have been in force, designed to neutralise tax mismatches arising from how a hybrid instrument or hybrid entity is treated for tax. Although the hybrid rules typically apply to cross-border dealings involving two or more jurisdictions, they can also apply to transactions that are entirely UK domestic. They specifically address: deduction/non-inclusion mismatches (D/NI mismatches), i.e. where a payment under a hybrid mismatch arrangement is deductible in the payer jurisdiction for tax purposes but is not included in the taxable income of a payee or a related party investor; and double deduction cases (DD cases), i.e. where a payment under a hybrid mismatch arrangement gives rise to more than one tax deduction. For more detail on the hybrid rules, see Practice Note: Hybrid mismatches—introduction to the rules. For an overview in table form of...

1 Your details Your name Job role Number of direct reports How long you have been in your current position 2 Skills analysis The purpose of this Learning needs analysis (LNA) questionnaire is to pinpoint any skills gaps that we can help you address through learning and development (L&D). 2.1 Skills required for your role Please complete the table below: Skill or activity Relevance and confidence level Do you need to do this to carry out your job effectively? ...

Course/presentation title [ Add details ] Course/presentation provider [ Add details ] Date of session [ Add date ] Online or in-person ☐ Online ☐ In-person at [ state venue ] Presenter/trainer [ Add details ] Length of session [ Add details ] Maximum number of delegates [ Add details ] Facilities required [ Add details ] Course materials required [ Add details ] Visual aids required [ Add details ] Who is this session aimed at? [ Add details ] What will be covered in this session? [ Add details ] Is this part of a series of courses? ☐ Yes—[ add details ] ☐ No Do delegates need to complete other sessions before this one? ☐ Yes—[ add details ] ☐ No What learning objectives...

A: Gut feel Comments or observations Instinctive income forecast B: Trends Data Year Fee income £ % uplift on prior year Indicators that the % change is not part of the wider trend [ 2025 ] [ 2024 ] [ 2023 ] [ 2022 ] [ 2021 ] Conclusions Comments or observations Trend analysis fee income prediction C: Capacity No. of fee earners Expected chargeable hours per fee earner Average hourly rate Expected gross income % of recorded time billed in previous years Capacity income prediction D: WIP (work in progress) levels Data Value of WIP at year end [ 2024 ] Value of WIP at year end [ 2025 ] Number of open files at year end [ 2024 ] Number of open files at year...

Amendments to the International Tax Compliance Regulations 2015 (2015 regs), SI 2015/878, introduced by the International Tax Compliance (Amendment) Regulations 2025, SI 2025/740, have brought in a compulsory Automatic Exchange of Information (AEOI) registration obligation for certain trusts treated as ‘specified non-reporting financial institutions’. Under the 2015 regs, SI 2015/878, reg 24(1), a specified non-reporting financial institution is ‘a non-reporting financial institution which is a trust within the meaning of Section VIII(B)(1)(e) of the CRS or paragraph II(D) of Annex II to the FATCA agreement’. Set out below is a concise overview of the components of that definition. Financial institution (IEIM400610) The FATCA and CRS frameworks recognise four common categories of Financial Institution: custodial institution depository institution investment entity specified insurance company Where a private trust satisfies any Financial Institution definition, it will most commonly be treated as an Investment Entity...

Mary Ashley of 15 Old Square Higher SDLT rates apply where an individual buys a major interest in a single dwelling if conditions A–D are met at day‑end: A — consideration of £40,000 or more B — not subject to a lease with over 21 years unexpired C — purchaser owns another £40,000+ dwelling not so leased D — does not replace the only or main residence Dwelling includes a building or part used, suitable or being built/adapted as one dwelling, its gardens, grounds and benefiting land, and off‑plan contracts. Mixed‑use is excluded; no apportionment. As this freehold includes residential and non‑residential parts, it is mixed‑use, so the 3% surcharge should not arise. Sean Randall of Blick Rothenberg Limited The 3% applies to “higher rates transactions” in FA 2003, Sch 4ZA, paras 3–7, each requiring the main subject‑matter to consist of a major interest in at least one dwelling. The chargeable interest includes the first‑floor flat but does...

Assumptions have been made that this is an above-threshold procurement, conducted via a fully compliant public purchasing process in line with the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (PCR 2015), SI 2015/102, and that standstill notices were issued under PCR 2015, SI 2015/102, reg 86, to the winning tenderer and all unsuccessful tenderers, across the procurement process. We further assume the original contractor stopped trading (without entering insolvency) at any stage. Consequently, we have not examined the safe harbours that allow for modifying or substituting a contractor under PCR 2015, SI 2015/102, reg 72(1)(d) for this analysis. Where a public contract has collapsed because the supplier has stopped trading (with no sign of insolvency), and the contracting authority is contemplating appointing a replacement, several points require attention by decision-makers herein. A few illustrations are outlined below...