Legal certainty meaning

When starting a charitable public appeal, there is scant, if any, certainty that it will be successful. Accordingly, it is sensible to outline the key matters to be handled at the outset. This checklist aids the practitioner in explaining clearly those potential issues, or it can be passed to the promoters of the appeal to help keep these points front of mind...

This Checklist sets out actions that can be taken—some at procurement stage and others during the life of a project—to help minimise the chance of disputes emerging on construction projects... During the procurement process Select the right procurement route Ensure the procurement method fits the specific context. For instance, where the employer wants to maintain control of the design or specified materials, a traditional contract may suit better than design and build. Conversely, if an earlier start on site is essential, design and build might be the preferred choice. See Practice Note: Choosing the right procurement method—construction projects. Adopt the correct pricing structure Choose a pricing approach that aligns with the employer’s objectives. If price certainty is a priority, a lump sum contract is generally more suitable than a prime cost arrangement. Where a lump sum is used, avoid inserting an excessive number of provisional sums, as these can undermine the desired cost certainty. See Practice Notes:...

This Checklist outlines the principal points to weigh up when drafting term and termination provisions in a commercial contract for use by the parties. For additional guidance on the duration and ending of commercial contracts generally, in practice, see: Practice Note: Drafting term and termination clauses—commercial contracts and Contract termination—overview General drafting points The common law has developed a series of principles concerning contract length and termination. For instance, where a contract says nothing about duration, a court may imply a right to end it on reasonable notice. In some situations, parties may also end a contract for repudiatory breach. Nevertheless, it is usually better to set out express terms on duration and termination to give the parties certainty, rather than depending on common law. If a contract lacks express termination rights, it may be uncertain whether a given breach allows the innocent party to bring the agreement to an end. A termination clause enables the parties to customise termination to their...

On 4 July 2025, the Court of Appeal unanimously dismissed challenges by Apple, Visa, Mastercard and Sony to the validity of commonly used funding arrangements that calculate a funder’s fee or return as a multiple of their outlay or costs in class actions and class action claims, a ruling expected to lift spirits across a funding sector seriously rocked by the Supreme Court’s PACCAR judgment and its effects. Macfarlanes LLP partner Malcolm Hitching said the outcome is significant because it recognises that collective proceedings are a necessary part of the legal landscape, that consumers do need protection, and that the Competition Appeal Tribunal is there to provide that protection. He observed that, had the Court of Appeal reached the opposite view, it would have been difficult to see how a funder could actually provide funding to a collective group of claimants. Sony and others had disputed whether litigation funding agreements, amended in response to a 2023 ruling by the top court, known as PACCAR, could be enforced....

JP Morgan International Finance Ltd v Werealize.Com Ltd; Karonis and others v JP Morgan International Finance Ltd [2025] EWHC 1842 (Comm) What are the practical implications of this case? The ruling delivers valuable guidance on cross-border enforcement of exclusion of liability clauses and on the situations in which ASI relief will be granted to shield such bargains. Key consequences for commercial practitioners include: Drafting immunity and exclusion clauses: the court held that where parties agree that none owes a duty of care, or tortious liability, they have by implication undertaken not to commence proceedings alleging such responsibility. This stands as a significant authority supporting the enforceability of wide immunity clauses. Commercial drafters should consider whether express ‘no sue’ undertakings offer greater certainty than reliance on implied terms Third party protection: the court’s reasoning showed that directors could benefit from immunity clauses via agency mechanisms (clause 33), even though they are not full parties to other elements of the agreement, illustrating how contractual structures...

What are the practical implications of this case? This ruling has meaningful consequences for advisers working on intra‑EU investment disputes and on enforcement tactics. Strategic seat selection: The judgment confirms that choosing a seat outside the EU—most notably Singapore—can shield ECT arbitrations from intra‑EU objections grounded in Achmea and Komstroy. Although those CJEU authorities expose intra‑EU awards to challenge within the Union, they do not impugn the validity of such awards in jurisdictions beyond the EU framework. Seat selection is therefore a critical strategic choice from the outset of any intra‑EU investor‑State dispute. Enforcement planning: Award creditors should look to enforce in non‑EU courts that are not bound by EU law doctrines. The SICC’s firm rejection of the intra‑EU objection outlines a clear path to enforcement outside the EU, offering a practical alternative where courts in EU Member States may decline recognition and enforcement. Definition of ‘investment’: The court’s refusal to apply the Salini criteria where the treaty provides its own definition of ‘investment’...

This Practice Note This Practice Note describes how sustainability agreements are assessed at present. It first indicates when sustainability initiatives and sustainability standardisation arrangements fall within Article 101 TFEU, as interpreted in the updated Horizontal Guidelines issued. It then recaps what the revised Horizontal Guidelines say about the circumstances and methods for justifying sustainability agreements under Article 101(3) TFEU in practice. Finally, it adds context by outlining recent national developments in this field also. Regulation (EU) No 1217/2010, the Research and Development Block Exemption Regulation (R&D BER 2010), and Regulation (EU) No 1218/2010, the Specialisation Block Exemption Regulation (SBER 2010)—collectively termed the Horizontal Block Exemption Regulations (HBERs)—together with the Guidelines on the Applicability of Article 101 TFEU to Horizontal Co-operation Agreements (Horizontal Guidelines), lapsed on 30 June 2023. As background, on 1 March 2022 the European Commission opened a public consultation, inviting interested stakeholders to submit views on drafts of the revised HBERs and on a draft revised Guidelines on the Applicability of Article 101 TFEU to Horizontal...

In October 2021, countries participating in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)/G20 Inclusive Framework on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) (the OECD Inclusive Framework) endorsed a ‘two-pillar’ package addressing the tax issues stemming from the digitalisation of the global economy. The two pillars constitute an ambitious effort to reform and modernise international tax rules that allocate where, and how, profits are taxed. Pillar One is chiefly (though not exclusively) aimed at the digital economy: ‘a world where enterprises can effectively be heavily involved in the economic life of different jurisdictions without any significant physical presence and where new and often intangible value drivers increasingly come to the fore’. Pillar One introduces two elements: a new taxing right that stretches beyond traditional tax nexus rules anchored in physical location (Amount A) a standardised methodology for transfer pricing baseline marketing and distribution activities between related parties (Amount B). This Practice Note provides a high-level summary of: the tax...

Introduction This Practice Note is part of our LLB Contract Law suite, aimed at students. In contract law, a vitiating factor is something that damages the legal validity of the consent needed for a binding agreement. One such factor is misrepresentation, where one party makes a false statement to another. This Practice Note outlines misrepresentation in English contract law, showing how inaccurate pre-contract statements undermine real consent and render contracts voidable rather than void. It sets out the elements of an actionable claim (a false statement of fact or law, inducement and attribution), separates fraudulent, negligent and innocent misrepresentation, and reviews the key cases alongside the Misrepresentation Act 1967. Particular emphasis is placed on remedies, especially rescission and damages, and on the equitable bars to rescission (affirmation, lapse of time, impossibility of restitution, third-party rights and judicial discretion). Throughout, it brings together judicial reasoning, policy considerations and exam-focused guidance, illustrating how modern case law balances fairness to the misled party with certainty in commercial transactions. Overview Definition and...

Precedent transfer A flexible Word edition of the TR1 precedent can be obtained via this link to download, save or print: Drafting notes to precedent transfer Panel 1—Title numbers If several properties are included, list each title number in alphanumeric sequence and, if desired, number them from one; then list the properties in the identical sequence with matching numbers. Use form TR5 if there is a large volume of registered titles. Panel 2—Property description The optional wording is intended for use where the Property is unregistered. For a transfer of the whole of unregistered land, a plan is normally unnecessary. It will usually be enough to cite the conveyance or instrument that contains the property description. A plan need only be added where the root conveyance or instrument does not allow the land to be identified fully or with certainty (for example, by containing a plan, by referring to a plan in an earlier deed, or by including or referring to a sufficiently clear...

Section 14 of the Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996) Under section 14 AA 1996, the parties may themselves decide the point at which an arbitration begins; failing any such agreement, the statute prescribes when the arbitration is treated as having started under the statutory framework in place. Where a party is approaching expiry of the limitation period for starting arbitration, precision over the moment of commencement is critical. In addition, certainty on this question matters because a range of other key dates, including the schedule for appointing the tribunal, flow from the date on which proceedings are taken to have commenced. For further guidance on limitation periods, see Practice Notes: Commencement date of an arbitration under the AA 1996 and arbitration rules, Limitation periods in arbitration (England & Wales) and Foreign Limitation Periods Act 1984...

Decommissioning Relief Deed (DRD) The Decommissioning Relief Deed (DRD) constitutes an agreement between the UK Government and a ‘Qualifying Company’ active in the oil and gas exploration and production sector within the UK or on the United Kingdom Continental Shelf (UKCS). The DRD is designed to give clarity over the tax relief a Qualifying Company will obtain at the point of decommissioning and, in certain circumstances, can lead to a payment by the UK Government to the Qualifying Company. For further detail on DRDs, refer to Practice Note: Decommissioning:—overview of the decommissioning relief deed. The DRD follows a mandated template and is not open to amendment...

Lease or licence? In Street v Mountford, the House of Lords set out the core indicators of a tenancy. These focus on the substance of the arrangement rather than the label attached to it: exclusive possession of specified premises Although the payment of rent may suggest a tenancy, it is not essential. Whether the proposed arrangement is a lease or a licence turns on the agreement taken as a whole; where the parties in reality confer exclusive possession, that result cannot be avoided by calling the document something else. What counts is the essence of the bargain, not its outward form or chosen description. Even where the paperwork is properly framed at the outset as a true licence, the parties’ subsequent behaviour may alter the character of the arrangement so that a tenancy is later created. For further discussion, see Practice Note: Leases and licences of land—key features and differences, together with the commentary in Hill and Redman’s Division A from paragraph...

Was a tenancy created with this agreement? Because the term is under three years, a lease can still indeed be valid even though it was not executed as a deed. Therefore, a tenancy could have come into being based, provided there is exclusive possession (see commentary Halsburys Laws of England, 8. Nature of grant of exclusive possession), certainty of term, and payment of rent. The tenancy might also have been protected by the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (LTA 1954) on the footing that it was a fixed term lasting more than six months in duration...