“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.”
ParrisWhittakerAccess all documents on e-business
This Checklist outlines the practical considerations for a franchisor when launching an international franchise. A franchisor may wish to grow its network abroad to tap new territories and emerging markets, usually by entering into an international franchise agreement or an international development agreement. Nevertheless, the agreement and the structuring of the international arrangement can also present challenges and complications. This Checklist identifies some of the practical issues that a franchisor planning to expand overseas might encounter. Issues The franchise agreement will state that the franchisee must run the business in line with the franchisor’s operations manual. However, the business method described in that manual may not have been piloted or proven in the overseas territory. It will have been devised on assumptions tailored to the local market. A franchisee may therefore struggle to implement the method in the overseas territory if reliant on those assumptions. A franchisee is often contractually obliged to use the marketing material supplied by the franchisor under the agreement...
REMEMBER: The 42-day appeal deadline finishes at 4pm on the 42nd day. It is YOUR duty to ensure ALL required papers are submitted within that period. DO NOT LEAVE IT UNTIL THE LAST MINUTE. If your appeal is missing documents or pages, it is classed as ‘not properly instituted’, meaning it has not been correctly lodged. The Checklist Read sections 1 to 3 of the EAT Practice Direction 2024 and the T440 Guidance. Notice of Appeal: have you completed every section of the Notice of Appeal from decision of Employment Tribunal (Form T444)?...
Introduction This Checklist is intended for legal representatives who are involved in directly assisting witnesses to prepare trial witness statements within the Business and Property Courts, and which are subject to CPR PD 57AC. This Checklist should be read alongside Practice Note: Trial witness statements in the Business and Property Courts under CPR PD 57AC, which sets out the requirements in fuller detail...
Under the UK merger control rules the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) may assess or review mergers already completed as well as those still anticipated, provided a ‘relevant merger situation’ arises. See Practice Note: A ‘relevant merger situation’ under UK merger rules. Several distinct conditions must be fulfilled for such a ‘relevant merger situation’ to exist, and these requirements are set out in the flowchart provided below here...
Stage 1—preparing to bring a claim and pre-action matters Guidance on infringement, defences, ownership, injunctions, running disputes, and the Business and Property Courts Disclosure Scheme; cease and desist precedent; timetable checklist; key forms; IP insurance. Stage 2—letter of claim alleging copyright infringement Guidance on infringement, drafting letters of claim, unjustified threats and remedies, with precedents for standard and peer‑to‑peer infringement letters. Stage 3—commencing proceedings Notes on infringement, secondary infringement, permitted acts, remedies, criminal offences, the Business and Property Courts and the Disclosure Scheme; pleadings/initial disclosure precedents; Disclosure/IPEC flow tools; CPR claim/defence/settlement/default forms. Stage 4—case management Guidance on running disputes, costs management and the Disclosure Scheme; checklist; Chancery, Patents Court and IPEC Guides; Mitchell v NGN; core case‑management and disclosure forms. Stage 5—disclosure and evidence Notes on e‑disclosure, witness statements and the Disclosure Scheme; PD 57AC for Business and Property Courts trial statements (not...
This Flowchart sets out the consumer cancellation rights that must be made available to consumers entering on-premises contracts, off-premises contracts and distance contracts for the supply of services Use this guide when a practitioner needs to verify which cancellation entitlements apply to consumers purchasing services in accordance with the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013, SI 2013/3134 (CCR 2013). Note 1—a consumer is an individual acting for purposes that are wholly or mainly outside their trade, business, craft or profession. Note 2—certain sector-specific contracts are regulated separately, such as financial services contracts, rental contracts and package travel contracts, and are excluded in full from the CCR 2013. For more information, see Practice Note: Distance, doorstep and on-premises sales—Excluded contracts...
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...
Antitrust Commission issues SO to Meta over WhatsApp AI access limits; flags possible interim measures The Commission has delivered a statement of objections to Meta, outlining its preliminary assessment that Meta blocked third-party artificial intelligence (AI) assistants from accessing and engaging with users on WhatsApp, infringing Article 102 TFEU (AT.41034). The Commission considers that Meta’s behaviour risks preventing competitors from entering or growing in the rapidly expanding market for general-purpose AI assistants and has therefore indicated its intention to impose interim measures (subject to Meta’s rights of defence) to avoid serious and irreparable harm to competition. Background On 15 October 2025, Meta announced changes to its WhatsApp Business Solution Terms, effectively prohibiting third-party general-purpose AI assistants from the platform. Consequently, from 15 January 2026, Meta’s own assistant, Meta AI, has been the only AI assistant available on WhatsApp. On 4 December 2025, the Commission opened formal proceedings to examine whether this policy shift amounts to an abuse of dominance. The investigation covers the EEA, excluding Italy, where...
Mergers The Commission: approved with conditions Safran USA Inc.’s purchase of a portion of the Collins Aerospace aerospace actuation business...
Family business culture Given the relatively high expense of sourcing and appointing senior staff, holding on to the right people with the right expertise is vital for any firm, and even more so for a family-run enterprise where hiring can be tougher than for rivals. Working in a family company brings upsides; research points to greater loyalty, satisfaction, flexibility and security. Yet drawbacks can appear, such as ambiguity, perceived unfairness, muddled accountability and family politics. The task is to bring in senior leaders who align with the culture and to ensure they are incentivised to remain and help grow the business. Therefore, a family business must shape recruitment and induction so they reflect its distinctive culture and complexity. Not every senior executive will thrive in a family setting, and cultural alignment may, in the end, matter as much as formal credentials. This must be weighed against the need to attract high-calibre people and keep them engaged for the long haul. Practical measures available to family firms include supporting new...
CASE HUB ARCHIVED This archived case hub reflects the position as at the judgment of 7 December 2022; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline. Case facts Outline Appeal before the General Court seeking annulment of the Commission’s readopted infringement decision of 17 December 2020, which imposed a reduced fine amounting to €9.4m (AT.39563). Latest development On 7 December 2022, the General Court delivered its judgment and dismissed the appeal in full. In particular, it found that: (i) CCPL grasped the Commission’s reasoning, and the material presented by CCPL was insufficient to overturn the presumption applied by the Commission that CCPL exercised decisive influence over entities within the CCPL group; and (iii) the Commission did not err in concluding that a fine reduction can only be warranted by the aim of preventing the undertaking’s economic viability from being irreparably endangered and its assets stripped of value, so the applicant’s intention to develop operating companies of the CCPL group cannot, in principle, justify such...
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...
1 General information Report date: [ Enter date ] Previous report date: [ Enter date ] Report submitted by: [ Enter name ] 2 Action points arising from last report Action item: [ Enter action point ], Responsible person: [ Identify person responsible for this action point ], Status: [ Enter status ] Action item: [ Enter action point ], Responsible person: [ Identify person responsible for this action point ], Status: [ Enter status ] Action item: [ Enter action point ], Responsible person: [ Identify person responsible for this action point ], Status: [ Enter status ] Action item: [ Enter action point ], Responsible person: [ Identify person responsible for this action point ], Status: [ Enter status ] 3 Executive summary This report covers the following items: 3.1 overview of business operations; 3.2 account of the operation of competition law compliance systems and controls;...
As offerings become more technologically advanced and include integrated systems and features, assessing whether tying or bundling might be seen as anti-competitive grows more complex. This checklist is designed to help you weigh key competition law considerations before linking or packaging products. Always seek advice from [ insert, eg the legal team ] where indicated below, and if you have any queries or concerns... 1 Products and market Evaluate whether the items proposed for a bundle or tie are genuinely separate products. Can the products being bundled or tied be treated as distinct offerings? Yes — consult [ insert, eg the legal team ], as bundling may adversely affect suppliers of stand‑alone products and thus harm competition No — [Insert comments] Do other organisations in the market use bundling and tying?...
Behaviour red flags are situations that should prompt you to probe further. Though they can be hard to spot, many scenarios can indicate the presence of anti-competitive conduct. This awareness tool highlights potential competition law warning signs, indicators, traits or behaviours to be especially alert to at all times. Even a single red flag may suggest anti-competitive conduct. 1 Cartel behaviour Any attempt to fix prices. Any attempt to engage in bid-rigging. ...
If a business claims to hire and remunerate an individual with a wage to reduce the tax burden of the business itself or a director/shareholder, while the individual in reality undertakes no work and supplies no services, this would appear to constitute tax evasion. Where a solicitor knows this is happening, they should adhere to the procedures prescribed in the firm’s policy on preventing the facilitation of tax evasion in such circumstances...
Please note, this Q&A deals exclusively with UK bribery legislation. Payment of commissions We refer you to Practice Note: How to identify when a commission might become a bribe, which explains that any commission involves providing a financial advantage, albeit it will not invariably amount to a bribe. The Bribery Act 2010 (BA 2010) adopts a wide view of what can constitute a bribe. It is characterised as a 'financial or other advantage' offered or received in a business setting, which amounts to, or induces, the improper performance of a relevant function or activity...
The Employment Agencies Act 1973, together with the Conduct of Employment Agencies and Employment Businesses Regulations 2003, SI 2003/3319 (Conduct Regs 2003), regulate the private recruitment sector and establish minimum requirements for employment agencies and employment businesses trading from premises in Great Britain (ie England, Wales and Scotland). The Conduct Regs 2003 apply in circumstances where an employment agency or an employment business provides work-finding services to a work-seeker...