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 Invasive alien species of Member State concern, Article 3(4)

Invasive alien species of Member State concern, Article 3(4) meaning

Published by a LexisNexis EU Law expert
What does Invasive alien species of Member State concern, Article 3(4) mean?
A designation used in EU invasive species practice for a non-native species that is not on the EU “Union concern” list but which, on scientific evidence, a member State considers would cause significant adverse impacts if released or spread within all or part of its territory, such that national action is required. Defined in Article 3(4) of Regulation (EU) 1143/2014, it allows a Member State to place such species on its own list and apply domestic measures (for example, restrictions on keeping, sale, transport, release and management). Key features are: not of Union concern; evidence-led national assessment; significance of impact need not be fully ascertained; and the ability to impose Member State-level controls. It is typically used in risk assessment, listing decisions and enforcement where EU-wide listing is absent. Jurisdictional note: In Ireland (an EU Member State) Article 3(4) continues to apply. In England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, the INNS EU exit Regulations removed this definition from retained UK IAS law after IP completion day, so the “Member State concern” category is not used; GB/UK practitioners will encounter domestic listing and control mechanisms instead. Cross‑border matters may still reference the EU definition.
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 Invasive alien species of Member State concern, Article 3(4)

CHECKLISTS
Provider Selection Regime 2023: Checklist for Notice of Intention to Award to an Existing Provider using Direct Award Process C (health care services), for UK central digital platform submission

This Checklist This Checklist explains the particulars that must appear in a notice to be submitted to the UK central digital platform to satisfy the applicable transparency duties imposed by the Health Care Services (Provider Selection Regime) Regulations 2023 (PSR Regs 2023), SI 2023/1348, reg 9(4), Sch 3, following the direct award made of a health care contract under Direct Award Process C...

Read More Right Arrow
CHECKLISTS
Pre‑drafting checklist for private trusts: parties, assets, powers, administration and tax (England and Wales)

1. Settlor Gather the following details about the settlor (or each settlor, where there is more than one): full name and courtesy title status date of birth address domicile nationality usual residence a schedule of assets and liabilities (for this purpose, a separate schedule is useful) 2. Name of the trust Confirm with the settlor what the trust should be named 3. ...

Read More Right Arrow
CHECKLISTS
Easements in property transactions: due diligence checklist on identification, registration, scope, maintenance, interference, alteration/termination, utilities, and creation/reservation—England and Wales

ARCHIVED: This Flowchart has been archived and is not maintained. Retained EU law is a concept introduced by the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 (EU(W)A 2018) as part of Brexit preparations, establishing a new category of domestic legislation. It denotes the collection of EU‑derived rules preserved and converted into UK law under the EU(W)A 2018 (as amended) at the end of the post‑Brexit transition period (IP completion day). For background on the transition period, and what it means for retained EU law, see: In the context of Brexit, what is meant by the ‘transition or implementation period’? For further background reading on the underlying legislation, see: Practice Note: Brexit—key legislation explained News Analysis: What does IP completion day mean for the status of EU law in the UK? What is retained EU law? Retained EU law is a broad, complex legal term defined by the EU(W)A 2018. It covers anything that continues to form part of domestic law on or...

Read More Right Arrow

View the related Flowcharts about Invasive alien species of Member State concern, Article 3(4)

FLOWCHARTS
Internal procurement process: worked example flowchart with documentation, evaluation, audit trail, supplier due diligence, approval limits, precedents, quotation types and value thresholds

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...

Read More Right Arrow
FLOWCHARTS
Building and operating websites: IP and brand, regulatory, contractual and dispute issues—lawyers’ flowchart

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...

Read More Right Arrow
FLOWCHARTS
Live telephone direct marketing decision tree (UK): PECR 2003 and UK GDPR compliance—lawful basis, TPS/CTPS, suppression lists, claims management and pensions bans, identity/transparency duties; excludes automated calls

These Flowcharts These Flowcharts offer direction on the proper method for completing the parts of a stock transfer form that address consideration, stamp duty certification, and execution. They are included within an annotated stock transfer form, which clearly sets out instructions explaining how its sections should be properly filled in...

Read More Right Arrow

View the related News about Invasive alien species of Member State concern, Article 3(4)

NEWS
EU competition law daily briefing: statement of objections to Meta over WhatsApp AI assistant access ban; possible interim measures; updated reform timeline; merger clearances; State aid decisions; key upcoming dates

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...

Read More Right Arrow
NEWS
EU competition law: CJEU rules on cartel fine interest; Brussels I follow-on damages jurisdiction; Madeira Free Zone state aid; merger notifications; DMA gatekeeper designations (4 July 2024)

Antitrust Court of Justice dismisses appeal relating to the calculation of the fine in the pre-stressing cartel case The Court of Justice has delivered its ruling in Case C-70/23, Westfälische Drahtindustrie and Others v Commission, on an appeal brought against the General Court’s judgment in Case T-275/20. That judgment had rejected an action seeking annulment of the Commission’s decision of 30 June 2010, as later amended on 30 September 2010, in the pre-steel cartel matter (AT.38344) (the Commission’s 2010 decision). In 2010, the Commission imposed fines on Westfälische Drahtindustrie GmbH (WDI) and Westfälische Drahtindustrie Verwaltungsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG (WDV), holding WDI jointly and severally liable with WDV and Pampus, for their participation in a cartel covering the supply of pre-stressing steel. On 15 July 2015, the General Court dismissed an appeal against the Commission’s 2010 decision (the General Court’s 2015 judgment). While it considered that the Commission had erred in its assessment of arguments on ability to pay, the General Court, exercising its unlimited jurisdiction, concluded...

Read More Right Arrow
NEWS
EU competition daily round-up: Commission merger clearances, FSR decision, and State aid and TCTF approvals — 4 April 2025

Mergers The Commission: approved with conditions Safran USA Inc.’s purchase of a portion of the Collins Aerospace aerospace actuation business...

Read More Right Arrow

View the related Practice Notes about Invasive alien species of Member State concern, Article 3(4)

PRACTICE NOTES
Admissibility of Evidence in Driving Offence Prosecutions: Driver Identification, Certificates, DVLA, Prescribed Devices, Highway Code, Hearsay, Expert Evidence (England and Wales)

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...

Read More Right Arrow
PRACTICE NOTES
Allocating Intra‑UK Civil Jurisdiction under the CJJA 1982: Scope, Domicile, Special/Exclusive Jurisdiction, Agreements, Consumer/Employment, Forum Non Conveniens, and Interaction with Brussels I (recast) Post‑Brexit

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...

Read More Right Arrow
PRACTICE NOTES
UK LLP PSC register: identifying PSCs and RLEs, significant influence, fund structures, investigation duties, and Companies House filings (including ECCTA 2023 reforms)

People with significant control (PSC) regime The architecture of the people with significant control (PSC) regime, which first commenced on 6 April 2016, is contained in Part 21A of the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006). Its purpose is to tackle worries about the lack of transparency in corporate ownership, where historically the register captured only the legal holder of shares, not always the beneficial owner. By requiring a PSC register, more precise and up‑to‑date details are available about who ultimately owns and directs companies and other bodies, and this information is made public via the central register at Companies House and remains accessible to the public. It assists prospective investors in their decision‑making. It likewise aids law enforcement bodies with money laundering enquiries. LLPs formed under the Limited Liability Partnerships Act 2000 must keep a record of persons with significant control over the LLP under the Limited Liability Partnerships (Register of People with Significant Control) Regulations 2016, SI 2016/340 (the LLP Regulations), as amended by the Information about People...

Read More Right Arrow

View the related Precedents about Invasive alien species of Member State concern, Article 3(4)

PRECEDENTS
Balanced UK supply chain compliance schedule: anti-bribery, modern slavery, failure to prevent tax evasion and fraud; policies, training, records, audit and monitoring, flow-down, breach/termination, indemnity

The Schedule 1 Definitions 1.1 In this Schedule: Adequate Procedures – must be interpreted in line with BA 2010 and any guidance issued under it; Associated Person – means any or all of: (a) the officers, employees, agents, subcontractors, subsidiaries, and individuals Associated With a party (Associates); and (b) persons Associated With any of those Associates, in every instance engaged in carrying out services for, or on behalf of, that party, the Services, and/or this Agreement; and Associated With – where used: (a) in paragraph 2 and in relation to bribery, is to be construed in accordance with BA 2010 and guidance issued under it; (b) in paragraph 4 and regarding the facilitation of tax evasion, is to be construed in accordance with Part 3 of CFA 2017 and guidance issued under it; (c) in paragraph 5 and as regards fraud, is to be construed in accordance with Part 5 of ECCTA 2023 and guidance issued under it; BA 2010 – means the...

Read More Right Arrow
PRECEDENTS
Settlement agreement precedent (Scotland) for civil court or arbitration disputes, including release, agreement not to sue, confidentiality and joint minute

This Agreement is dated [ date ] Parties [ insert name of the pursuer ], a company registered in Scotland (no [ insert company number ]), whose [ registered office OR principal place of business ] is at [ insert address ] (the Pursuer) [ and ] [ ; ] [ insert name of defender ], a company registered in Scotland (no [ insert company number ]), whose [ registered office OR principal place of business ] is at [ insert address ] (the Defender). Each being a Party and, together, the Parties. Whereas (A) [ Insert details of the background to the dispute eg ‘The Parties entered into a contract for the supply of certain goods etc ]. (B) A dispute has emerged between the Parties regarding [ insert details of the dispute ] (the Dispute). (C) [ Proceedings were raised by the Pursuer against the Defender on [ date ] by way of [ Summons OR...

Read More Right Arrow
PRECEDENTS
Precedent Sterling term loan facility agreement (bilateral) for single corporate borrower, with optional security and/or parent guarantee (England and Wales)

This Agreement, dated [ • ] 20[ • ], is entered into between the following parties: Parties [ insert name of Borrower ], a company incorporated in England and Wales with registered number [ insert company number ], whose registered office is at [ insert address ] (the Borrower); and [ insert name of Lender ] of [ insert address ] (the Lender). Background (A) [ insert description of background to transaction ]. (B) The Lender has agreed to provide the Facility (as defined below) to the Borrower on the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement...

Read More Right Arrow

View the related Q&As about Invasive alien species of Member State concern, Article 3(4)

Q&As
LRA 2002 s.4 rentcharges: first registration and transfer validity

The general rule The general rule is that when a buyer of a freehold interest enters into covenants with the seller, although the burden of restrictive obligations will in many instances bind a successor in title, positive duties requiring the covenantor to act do not run when the freehold is conveyed. A rentcharge operates as a device by which a monetary duty can pass to the successor of the initial buyer. There is no issue, as a matter of contractual privity, in imposing on the purchaser a contractual obligation to pay the seller for the supply of services relating to the land; however, matters become more intricate once the seller transfers the freehold estate to a third party. The rentcharge nonetheless entitles its holder to demand regular periodic payments of money from the owner of the freehold estate. It is not a mortgage, because it does not function as security for a debt...

Read More Right Arrow
Q&As
TUPE: Can a transferee continue a pending disciplinary process?

The Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 (TUPE 2006), SI 2006/246, reg 4 Where a relevant transfer occurs under these provisions, there is a novation imposed by statute of the contracts of employment of the staff who transfer; the incoming employer stands in the place of the outgoing employer, and each employment contract continues after the transfer as if it had been originally concluded between the employee and the transferee throughout for all relevant legal purposes thereafter...

Read More Right Arrow
Q&As
Case law: grant of parental responsibility under s 12(2A) CA 1989

Section 12(2A) of the Children Act 1989 (ChA 1989) Inserted by paragraph 21(4) of Schedule 2, Part 1 of the Children and Families Act 2014 (CFA 2014), Section 12(2A) of the Children Act 1989 (ChA 1989) came into force on 22 April 2014. This statutory amendment to ChA 1989, s 12 expressly empowers the court to confer parental responsibility on an individual who is neither a parent nor a guardian of the child, but who is identified in a relevant child arrangements order (CAO) as a person with whom the child spends time or otherwise has contact. Any parental responsibility granted under ChA 1989, s 12(2A) endures only for as long as the corresponding CAO currently remains operative. Although the provision has been operative for more than two years, there seem to be no reported cases that consider ChA 1989, s 12(2A)...

Read More Right Arrow