Funding level meaning

A: Before you begin Before pursuing a merger, you and your law firm must hold a clear and candid view of your starting point—the firm’s current position, your strategic aims, and the capability to realise those aims. For further guidance, see Practice Note: Mergers—law firms. All principals should fully understand the: economics of your business, including sustainable profitability and cash flow funding requirements of the business risk and compliance framework and its track record Without such clarity, expectations may diverge and valuable time can be lost. This Checklist sets out the key issues to consider. It does not cover regulatory requirements, due diligence, warranties, deal structure and similar matters, which remain critical but will vary with the specifics of the transaction. The areas addressed here are those that, if tackled thoroughly, should give any law firm merger a significantly better chance of success...

TPR confirmed that, under the terms of the new agreement, ITV will bring the 2,800 Box Clever scheme members into its own pension arrangement. This move guarantees members their full entitlements, including back payments owed to them, replacing the reduced-level payments they had been receiving since 2014 under the Pension Protection Fund (PPF). 'Today's announcement shows how we deploy our powers to safeguard savers and, if required, vigorously pursue matters through the courts to secure an acceptable outcome,' said Mel Charles, the regulator's interim executive director of regulatory compliance. Box Clever was created in 2000 as a joint venture between Granada (now part of ITV) and Thorn Finance Ltd, which has since been renamed Carmelite Capital Ltd. When the venture failed in 2003, the pension fund was left underfunded and, as a result, prompted TPR to examine whether ITV had potential financial responsibilities to the scheme. In 2011 TPR warned ITV of its intention to issue financial support directions to five companies that were within its group, on the basis...

On 18 November, European Commissioner for Justice Michael McGrath said he had heard industry feedback and concluded the EU need not impose rules on third‑party funding. Instead, Europe would centre efforts on implementing EU legislation that brings in a pathway for consumer class actions throughout the bloc, rather than drafting further regulatory measures at present. He explained that, based on that input, the Commission would give priority to overseeing how the Representative Actions Directive is applied in consumer collective redress, speaking at the closing session of the EU’s high‑level forum on justice for growth. On 20 November 2025, Paul Kong, executive director of the International Legal Finance Association (ILFA), welcomed McGrath’s unequivocal indication that regulation of third‑party litigation finance at EU level is not envisaged. He added that this seemed to shut down any discussion about fresh rules, which, in his view, lacked any evidential basis...

In this issue: The Pensions Regulator Funding, surplus and investment Members and benefits Daily and weekly news alerts Dates for your diary Trackers The Pensions Regulator TPR enhances oversight of the largest DC schemes to improve member outcomes The Pensions Regulator (TPR) has unveiled enhancements to its supervision of master trusts and defined contribution (DC) schemes after a 12‑month review. The redesigned model groups schemes into four supervisory segments with bespoke engagement to spot risks sooner and lift saver outcomes. These cover monoline, commercial and non‑commercial master trusts; collective DC schemes; and single plus connected employer DC schemes. TPR’s priorities are securing value for money for all savers and setting clear expectations on investments, data quality and at‑retirement innovation. Larger schemes will be supported by dedicated multi‑disciplinary teams to enable more targeted, expert‑level interactions. The change marks a tilt towards a more prudential regulatory stance, addressing scheme‑specific and market‑wide risks across the UK pensions landscape. TPR said...

This Practice Note reviews the principal issues and risks that routinely arise on major construction for education providers, spanning higher education, further education, academies and independent schools. See also Practice Note: Building Schools for the Future/Priority School Building Programme [Archived]. Typical procurement routes While any conventional procurement route can be used on an education project, three factors usually drive the route selected by education clients for their construction programmes: Nature of client Education clients seldom commission large capital schemes. It is not their core activity and, except for sizeable university estates teams, they rarely possess the in-house expertise to procure major works successfully. They are regarded as inexperienced construction clients. Funding Funding is often capped and time limited. As a result, works are commonly let on a fixed-price contract, typically at a higher cost, to secure the level of certainty and control sought by funders (public or private investment) and governors. See Funding below. Risk management Site risks on education schemes are generally...

Borrowers can choose from a broad range of debt and capital structuring routes. Traditionally, senior debt (typically provided by banks) sat at the top, then mezzanine finance, followed by junior debt, each ranking ahead of unsecured creditors and shareholders/equity holders. After the 2007/8 credit crunch, businesses increasingly tapped capital markets and non-bank sources (eg private credit) to widen their funding, adding further layers of indebtedness. This Practice Note offers a straightforward overview of the different tiers of debt and security a restructuring lawyer may encounter. It outlines the financing layers and the forms of security commonly seen in practice by a restructuring lawyer. It also sketches how those tiers now sit together in practice. Capital structures and interplay between creditors Typically, external borrowings sit at the operating company (Opco) level. The Opcos own the core business assets (eg premises, key manufacturing equipment and valuable intellectual property), produce most of the profits, and lenders seek security over those assets. In some arrangements, high-value items such as intellectual property or...

Scope of this Practice Note This Practice Note examines the UK regulatory considerations encountered by crowdfunding platforms from a financial services standpoint. It ought to be read in conjunction with the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (FSMA 2000), together with relevant secondary legislation, and regulatory rules and guidance, including, in particular, provisions within the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) Handbook and the FCA’s webpage devoted to crowdfunding. This Note briefly outlines initiatives at EU level in relation to regulating crowdfunding, which are discussed in detail in Practice Note EU Regulation of crowdfunding—the ECSP Regulation and the MiFID II Crowdfunding Directive. Crowdfunding (sometimes referred to as 'crowd sourcing' or 'crowd financing') operates on the basis that individuals seeking capital, such as entrepreneurs, present ventures or businesses on an online platform, and members of the public contribute funds through that platform. There is no ceiling on an individual contribution; however, unlike more established fundraising methods, many platforms enable participants to put in as little as £10. Typically, the entrepreneur will be...

1 Introduction 1.1 Client care sits at the heart of the regulatory framework governing our work. We are committed to delivering a high standard of service to every client—this duty is shared by all staff to ensure we meet that aim. 1.2 This client care manual covers everyone working at any level, including partners, consultants, solicitors, other employees (whether permanent, fixed-term or temporary), contractors, trainees, secondees, home-workers, casual staff, agency staff, interns and students, agents, sponsors, volunteers, or any other person connected with the firm wherever based (together called ‘staff’ in this manual). 1.3 References to a ‘fee earner’ in this manual include all staff handling client matters and/or those responsible for managing client relationships, irrespective of their seniority or qualifications. 2 Responsibility The Compliance Officer for Legal Practice (COLP) holds responsibility for this client care manual and supervises the firm’s client care arrangements. If the COLP is unavailable and a response is required, you should contact [state who should be contacted, eg their deputy,...

1 Introduction 1.1 Client and matter inception is a vital process that safeguards our firm, helps us understand our clients and their particular requirements, and ensures adherence to a range of regulatory obligations in full. 1.2 This document clearly explains our procedure for accepting new clients and opening new matters. It applies to all relevant people working at every level, including partners, consultants, solicitors, and other employees (whether permanent, fixed‑term or temporary), contractors, trainees, seconded staff, home‑workers, casual staff, agency staff, interns and students, agents, sponsors, volunteers, or any other person associated with the firm wherever located (collectively referred to as ‘staff’ in this policy). 2 Responsibility The [ insert, eg compliance officer for legal practice (COLP) ] holds responsibility for this document and oversees the firm’s arrangements for both client and matter inception. If they are not available and a prompt response is needed, please contact [ state who should be contacted, eg their deputy, your line manager, a partner ] as appropriate. 3...