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

“While we began looking at LexisNexis products primarily for cost saving, it quickly became more about customer service, ease of onboarding, ongoing training and breadth of resources available.”

Co-Op

Access all documents on Filtering

Filtering meaning

What does Filtering mean?
Filtering describes the practical process of narrowing large document or data sets to those likely to be relevant and excluding irrelevant, duplicate, privileged or confidential material. It is a descriptive term used across disclosure/discovery, regulatory and internal investigations, and responses to data subject access requests (DSARs), rather than a defined term in legislation or case law. Typical techniques include keyword and date-range searches, custodian and file-type scoping, de-duplication, email threading, near-duplicate and concept analytics, technology assisted review (TAR)/predictive coding, and privilege or confidentiality screens with redaction. Filtering should be proportionate, documented and reproducible, with audit trails and, in litigation, agreement on protocols where possible. In England and Wales, the CPR and PD 57AD (Business and Property Courts) recognise search-based review and TAR, and the Disclosure Review Document requires parties to set out proposed filtering. Courts have approved predictive coding (for example, Pyrrho Investments v MWB; Brown v BCA Trading). In Ireland, TAR has judicial approval (Irish Bank Resolution Corporation v Quinn). In Scotland and Northern Ireland, recovery/discovery rules require reasonable, proportionate searches, and similar filtering methods are used in practice. For DSARs, controllers must make reasonable searches (UK GDPR/Data Protection Act 2018; Irish GDPR regime) and apply lawful exemptions, including legal professional...
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 Filtering

CHECKLISTS
Complete keyword taxonomy for the UK Financial Services Enforcement Database (FCA, PRA, PSR): search terms for Final and Decision Notices, 2014–present

The Financial Services Enforcement Database Holds comprehensive details on all material Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) Final Notices and, where available, Decision Notices, covering the period from 2014 to the present. It further includes any Decision Notices issued by the Payment Systems Regulator (PSR). Beyond enabling filtering by rule contravention, the Enforcement Database also permits users to refine and tailor results more precisely by sector, keywords, seriousness factors, aggravating factors, mitigating factors, financial penalty, and other actions such as appeals. This document outlines the keywords for the Financial Services Enforcement Database and serves as a reference to help identify words and phrases to search for across the Database...

Read More Right Arrow

View the related News about Filtering

NEWS
Sanctions amendments, enforcement gaps, beneficial ownership register access curbs, anti-corruption proposal, NCA professional enablers strategy, and updated compliance precedents—Risk and Compliance weekly update, 1 August 2024

In this issue: Data protection Financial sanctions Other financial crime LexTalk®Risk & Compliance: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts Trackers New and updated content Data protection France restricts access to beneficial ownership registry Law360 reports that France is dialling back access to its beneficial ownership information register by introducing a filtering system that limits what was previously a fully public database from 24 July 2024, the French Finance Ministry said on 29 July 2024. See News Analysis: France restricts access to beneficial ownership registry. Financial sanctions Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) (Amendment) (No 3) Regulations 2024 SI 2024/834 Made under the Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act 2018 (SAMLA 2018) in connection with assimilated law, these Regulations amend one item of UK secondary legislation and revoke another concerning sanctions. They came into force on 31 July 2024. See: LNB News 31/07/2024 21. Spotlight on Corruption publishes report criticising UK’s enforcement...

Read More Right Arrow
NEWS
Keeping Children Safe in Education 2025 (England): online safety (mis/disinformation), AI and filtering/monitoring, alternative provision duties, and update timetable—implications for policies, training and governors

The latest updated KCSIE 2025 guidance can be found here. Below are four essential points to be aware of today. Possible further updates The present edition mentions signposting towards forthcoming relationship, sex and health education guidance expected this summer. Therefore, a small potential additional tweak to KCSIE 2025 could appear before September. No changes are proposed, merely signposting currently. Annex F likewise notes that later versions may reflect the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill’s passage into law, insights from the Casey Audit, and the Violence Against Women and Girls strategy. Could that mean an update part-way through the year?...

Read More Right Arrow
NEWS
Advocate General’s opinion in EUIPO v Neoperl: General Court exceeded alteration jurisdiction by deciding unexamined grounds; guidance on Article 72(3) EUTMR and appeal filtering

EUIPO v Neoperl AG (AG opinion) Case C‑93/23 P What are the practical implications of this case? The Advocate General’s opinion clarifies the limits on how far the General Court may modify a decision of the EUIPO Board of Appeal. The General Court ought not to reach findings on facts that the earlier tribunal has not examined and determined, as doing so would strip that body of its function. In practical terms, parties should contest General Court judgments where they contain rulings on points that were not decided in the appealed case. The opinion reviews the appeal filtering mechanism and explains why this appeal was permitted to proceed. The conditions to be satisfied are stringent, and appeals progress only where they raise an issue of significance for the unity, consistency or development of EU law. The present appeal invites the Court of Justice to determine the scope and the conditions governing the exercise of the power to alter decisions vested in the General Court under Article 72(3) of...

Read More Right Arrow

View the related Practice Notes about Filtering

PRACTICE NOTES
Nanotechnology and nanomaterials regulation in the UK and EU: REACH nanoforms, 2022 definition, sectoral regimes, and post-Brexit divergence under the Windsor Framework

Nanotechnology—opportunities and risks Nanotechnology deals with the fabrication and application of matter at ultra-small scales. Nanomaterials are quantified in nanometres (nm) and can be many thousands of times thinner than a human hair; a single hair measures around 80,000 to 100,000 nm across. At these dimensions, substances display properties that diverge from those of the same material in bulk form, enabling novel uses while potentially introducing distinct hazards. Current adopters span key fields and wider industries: Biomedicine, electronics and energy Cosmetics, defence, automotive and agriculture Applications range from high-volume commodities, for example carbon black in car tyres, through to specialised, low-volume technologies. Cosmetics commonly incorporate nano titanium dioxide and zinc oxide to deliver functions such as UV filtering, while gold and silver nanoparticles feature in medical diagnostic tools. A 2023 report put the global nanotechnology market at US$69.15bn in 2022, projecting expansion to US$248.56bn by 2030. The European Commission regards micro/nano—electronics and photonics as a Key Enabling Technology that should be...

Read More Right Arrow
PRACTICE NOTES
Civil restraint orders in family proceedings under FPR 2010: GCRO criteria, procedure, permissions, breaches, duration and extensions (England and Wales)

This Practice Note sets out what a civil restraint order (CRO) is and when the court may make one under the Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010), SI 2010/2955, 4.8 and FPR 2010, PD 4B. It focuses on general civil restraint orders (GCROs), covering who may apply, their effect and how long they last (including how they can be extended or continued). It also addresses matters relevant to a party bound by a GCRO, such as seeking permission to amend or discharge the order and the consequences of breaching it... Civil restraint orders in family proceedings A CRO is not intended to bar access to the courts; rather, it safeguards the integrity of the court’s process by filtering applications made by litigants who are subject to a CRO. In short, applications that fall within the scope of an existing CRO must be considered by the judge specified in the order before they may proceed...

Read More Right Arrow
PRACTICE NOTES
Negotiating civil dispute settlements: strategy, client objectives, counterparty interests, without prejudice and 'subject to contract', tactics, meetings, and Calderbank/WPSAC/Part 36 offers (England and Wales)

This Practice Note sets out how to build a negotiation approach, offering tips on organising facts, aligning with client goals (including identifying the best alternative to a settlement), appraising the other side’s stance, selecting negotiation techniques, and deciding whether to open with a settlement proposal or a preliminary discussion. For direction on who should participate in settlement talks, and on confidentiality and the effect of ‘subject to contract’, see Practice Note: Settling disputes—who, confidentiality and subject to contract. For assisted routes to settlement, see Practice Note: What is ADR? and related material. For guidance on making offers and recording a deal, see Practice Notes: Settling disputes—settlement offers (Calderbank, WPSAC and Part 36) Settling disputes—how to document a settlement and related content Settling disputes—an early strategy for settlement A stage of litigation involves exchanging information under an applicable pre-action protocol or, if none governs the claim, under the Practice Direction Pre-Action Conduct and Protocols. The Letter of Claim and the Letter of...

Read More Right Arrow

View the related Precedents about Filtering

PRECEDENTS
Employer Policy on Criminal Records and DBS Checks: Recruitment, Lawful Processing, Filtering, Risk Assessment, and Handling/Retention of Certificate Information (England and Wales)

1 Introduction 1.1 This policy is intended to sit alongside the Company’s [ data protection policy (employment) ]. 1.2 It explains the Company’s approach to making enquiries about a prospective (or existing) employee’s criminal history, and to undertaking Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks. 1.3 This policy confirms our commitment to comply with the DBS Code of Practice and our data protection obligations, to treat prospective employees fairly, and to avoid unfair discrimination against any person who is the subject of a criminal record check on the basis of a conviction or other information disclosed. Its purpose is to describe how we meet our data protection obligations in relation to criminal records information and to protect such information, and to ensure that staff understand and follow the rules that govern the collection, use and deletion of criminal records information to which they may have access during the course of their work...

Read More Right Arrow