Justification meaning

This Checklist This Checklist outlines key points to consider when preparing or negotiating liquidated damages (LADs) provisions in a building contract, with a particular emphasis on LADs for late completion. It offers practical pointers and guidance designed to help ultimately ensure that LADs provisions in a building contract are properly enforceable...

For trustees and managers of occupational pension schemes: Confirm that the scheme’s provisions, criteria and practices (PCPs) have been examined and reviewed to verify compliance with the non-discrimination rule. Where a PCP seems prima facie discriminatory and appears not to fit an exemption, raise with employer the question of whether an objective justification can be demonstrated. Understand how both courts and tribunals typically assess the objective justification defence in general. Do not treat generalisations or stereotyped assumptions as an adequate answer or satisfactory explanation...

Practice Statement (Companies: Schemes of Arrangement under Part 26 and Part 26A of the Companies Act 2006) (Practice Statement 2020) Where a company puts forward a restructuring plan to creditors, the Practice Statement 2020 requires it to take every reasonably available step to alert any person affected that the plan is being advanced, explain the aim it seeks to achieve, and outline the creditor meetings the applicant considers will be required and how they are constituted, unless there is proper justification for not doing so (a consultation began in May 2025 intending to replace this Practice Statement by the end of July 2025; see: LNB News 09/05/2025 46). This notification is typically given by sending a practice statement letter to creditors ahead of the convening hearing. What amounts to sufficient notice of the convening hearing turns on the particular facts and circumstances (Practice Statement 2020, para 7) and is a highly fact‑sensitive inquiry (see Re PizzaExpress (convening)). In practical terms, the length of notice likely required may depend on:...

STOP PRESS: This document is being refreshed to align with the implementation of the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025 (DUAA 2025), which updates the UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018. For more detailed guidance on the compliance impact of DUAA 2025, see Practice Note: Data (Use and Access) Act 2025—compliance implications. The UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR) grants data subjects a range of rights, including the right to erasure of personal data, often referred to as the right to be forgotten. Individuals may ask an organisation to erase their personal data ‘without undue delay’ where there is no compelling justification for ongoing processing. This is not an unrestricted right; deletion applies only in particular circumstances. There are strict timeframes for responding to such requests. See Practice Notes: Rights of data subjects How to handle data subject requests This flowchart sets out a process for assessing erasure requests that your organisation receives under the UK GDPR...

In this issue: Key developments and materials Electricity and gas market regulation, licensing and taxation Renewable energy Capacity Market, balancing services and energy system flexibility Hydrogen, CCUS and emerging technologies Nuclear energy Planning issues in energy projects Air emissions, efficiency, and climate change New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Energy resources on Lexis+® Daily and weekly news alerts Key developments and materials DESNZ announces accelerated measures to boost UK energy security DESNZ has unveiled a suite of actions to reinforce and speed up the UK’s energy security in light of events in the Middle East. For the first time, ‘plug-in solar’ will be permitted in the UK. The department plans to advance the next annual renewables auction to July 2026 and has confirmed that the government will adopt the Fingleton Review’s recommendations to hasten delivery of nuclear power stations. It has also moved to safeguard consumers, working...

Webb and another (in their capacity as joint liquidators of Eversholt Rail (365) Ltd (in liquidation)) v Eversholt Rail Ltd and another company [2024] EWHC 2217 (Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? This case serves as a reminder to insolvency practitioners that orders under IA 1986, s 235 and IA 1986, s 236 are not automatic; a cogent justification is needed explaining why specified documents are reasonably required. Requests should be tightly focused in both timeframe and in the categories or classes of documents sought. The judge criticised not only the lack of specificity in the evidence, but also the failure to explain that lack. As the court has a broad discretion and will weigh a range of considerations, a request that is relatively unfocused may still be granted if there is a satisfactory reason it cannot be more precise, for example a complete lack of co-operation from the other side. What was the background? This application was made in relation to Eversholt...

Watson v Chief Constable of Humberside Police [2025] EWHC 2544 (KB) What are the practical implications of this case? This decision addresses who bears the burden of proof in claims for false imprisonment and assault, and underscores that any detention or use of force by police must be justified by the rationale an officer advances for acting as they did at the material time. It illustrates that disputes should be resolved on the pleaded issues and the evidence tested in court, and not beyond them. Positions resting on a narrative the court rejects will rarely withstand judicial examination, and judges ought not determine matters on hypothetical versions of a party’s case or on speculation. What was the background? The claimant, experiencing several physical frailties and impairments, made an emergency call saying he might cut his own throat owing to the distress he was experiencing. Police officers attended and discovered the claimant seated at a table on the communal lawn...

This Practice Note examines the principles governing the tort whereby a defendant deliberately interferes with a claimant’s rights in a judgment debt. For wider guidance on enforcing judgments, see: Introduction to enforcement—overview and related content. What is the Marex tort? The Marex tort describes a tort-based cause of action premised on an alleged intentional infringement of the claimant’s rights in a judgment debt. Its contours were first confirmed by Bryan J in 2021 in Lakatamia v Su, having been raised by Knowles J in 2017 in Marex v Garcia (also known as Marex v Sevilleja). See: Marex tort—history below. In Lakatamia v Su, Lakatamia pursued two claims against the defendants, Mr Su and his mother, Madam Su, including: unlawful means conspiracy—alleging a concerted plan to harm Lakatamia by unlawful means, through breaches of a 2011 worldwide freezing order in related Commercial Court proceedings against Mr Su (the Blair Freezing Order), by procuring the dissipation of two of Mr Son’s assets: the net sale proceeds...

Justification—the ‘justification defence’ This Practice Note explores the concept of justification—often termed the ‘justification defence’—within discrimination under the Equality Act 2010 (EqA 2010). It addresses what may amount to a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. It assesses proportionality in cases of indirect discrimination (EqA 2010, s 19(2)(d)), including where the objective is to prevent discrimination linked to other protected characteristics. It reviews the notion of a provision, criterion or practice (PCP) and considers issues arising in relation to direct and indirect age discrimination (EqA 2010, s 13(2)) and the Heyday case. In doing so, it evaluates objective justification, defence (no discrimination), the burden of proof, the approach a tribunal should adopt, and circumstances where discrimination rights come into conflict. This Practice Note includes references to case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). For guidance on whether judgments of the Court of Justice are binding on UK courts, see Practice Note: Assimilated law—Assimilated case law. Domestic measures enacted to fulfil UK obligations under...

Margin squeeze Margin squeeze is a form of exclusionary behaviour aimed at rivals, intended to remove them or undermine their viability—either by driving them from the market or by deterring entry at the outset. Where a vertically integrated firm holds a dominant position in an upstream market for a vital input and also supplies that input to wholesale customers who compete at retail, it can have both the means and the incentive to exclude those competitors from the downstream market. The dominant firm compresses retail rivals’ margins by setting a high wholesale charge, a low retail price, or a mix of the two, thereby narrowing the gap between the cost of essential inputs and the price attainable in the retail market. Consequently, the spread between the dominant undertaking’s retail price for the product or service and the wholesale price it levies on its rivals is insufficient to allow an efficient retail rival to compete effectively. This weakening of effective competition downstream can, in turn, result in higher prices, diminished...

Precedent sample privilege log Click to access the Precedent sample privilege log. Please note this register was created in Excel, so it cannot be exported to Word. This Precedent sample privilege log is suitable when an organisation runs an internal investigation. It helps you catalogue documents covered by legal professional privilege, indicate whether they are redacted or fully withheld, and state the rationale. Use it to note whether access is limited by redaction or complete withholding, together with the underlying justification. It is equally applicable where an organisation faces an external investigation. Legal professional privilege (LPP) shields documents from disclosure to third parties, including government agencies, regulators and claimants in civil proceedings. There are two categories of LPP: legal advice privilege litigation privilege See Practice Note: Internal investigations and legal professional privilege—Types of legal professional privilege...

[ Insert in para 6.1 of response form ET3: ] It is acknowledged that the Respondent maintains a policy or practice under which it expects candidates for roles within [ specify department ] to evidence, during interview, an adequate command of computing skills...

General Please select to access Excel version of this register. Add course title/summary and justification for training...