Mark-up meaning

The Investigatory Powers Act 2016 (IPA 2016) revamped the legal regime regulating covert surveillance by public authorities. IPA 2016 superseded large parts of the framework previously, though not solely, contained in the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA 2000). See Practice Note: The regulation of intelligence gathering—an introductory guide. This note outlines the offences introduced by IPA 2016. For details of general sentencing limits in a magistrates’ court, see Practice Note: Sentences imposed following conviction—General limits on magistrates’ courts powers to impose custodial sentences following conviction... Section Offence Statutory defence Maximum sentence IPA 2016, s 3 — Unlawful interception: a person, by conduct in the UK, deliberately intercepts a communication during its transmission without lawful authority. Defence: where the individual has the right to control the operation or use of the system, or had that person’s express or implied consent to carry out the interception. Maximum sentence: on summary conviction, a fine; on indictment, up to two years’ imprisonment and/or a...

A meeting with your line manager on your first day Setting up a meeting with your line manager on day one of your new role is strongly advisable. Although it will most likely be an initial ‘getting to know you’ chat, there are several questions you can raise to help you feel more at ease in the position. If you are the only in-house lawyer or leading an internal legal team, your line manager will typically be the CEO or Finance Director, though it could be any other director. If you are joining an existing team, your line manager may sit in a legal, regulatory or compliance function, for example: Company Secretary General Counsel Senior Solicitor Legal Director Compliance Director Alternatively, they may hold a non-legal post, such as Finance Director or CEO. In a larger team with multiple layers in the reporting structure, your line manager could be someone else within that hierarchy. This Checklist highlights the key...

This Checklist sets out the matters a landlord ought to weigh up where a tenant faces insolvency, highlighting the options open to the landlord, such as Commercial Rent Arrears Recovery (CRAR), forfeiture, drawing on a rent deposit, and pursuing former tenants, guarantors and sub-tenants. It further addresses practical considerations for the landlord, including steps for securing and marketing the property, and contacting the insolvency practitioner. What type of insolvency scenario applies to the tenant? The remedies that can be exercised, and the limits that will bite, differ depending on the particular insolvency arrangement affecting the tenant. Each procedure brings distinct constraints and options. For a table summarising the restrictions, see Practice Note: Quick guide to landlord’s remedies in tenant insolvency. Has contact been made with the insolvency practitioner? It is vital to liaise with the relevant insolvency practitioner to assess the tenant’s position and to evaluate what, if any, prospect exists of outstanding sums being repaid, future rents being protected, or the tenant emerging from the...

A straightforward visual chart clearly depicts Scotland's civil court system in a simple form...

As of 12 January 2023, the EU’s Regulation on foreign subsidies distorting the internal market (FSR) took effect...

Open or print a full-sized PDF version...

Mergers The Commission cleared: Hartree Partners Holdings, LP’s acquisition of exclusive control of Touton S.A. (M.12189), following a phase I investigation—see further in Midday Express the establishment of a joint venture by EVH Grüne Energie – Beteiligung GmbH & Co. KG and HSBC Alternative Investments S.C.A. SICAV-RAIF (M.12240), following a phase I investigation—see further in Midday Express the setting up of a joint venture by RCL Cruises Ltd....

Competition policy Commission publishes report on enforcement of EU antitrust and merger control rules in the pharmaceutical sector between 2018–2022 The Commission has issued a report on competition enforcement—covering antitrust and merger control—in the pharmaceutical sector, outlining the activities undertaken by the Commission and national competition authorities during 2018 to 2022. It updates an earlier 2019 report that examined the period from 2009 to 2017. Alongside a broad overview of enforcement in pharmaceuticals, the report describes the sector’s key features that guide competition assessments and, through concrete and practical examples, clearly demonstrates how competition law action protected undertakings and consumers, including in the course of the Covid-19 crisis...

Antitrust A fresh appeal has been filed before the General Court in Case T- 19/25, Teva Pharmaceutical Industries and Teva Pharmaceuticals Europe v Commission, challenging the Commission’s decision in Teva (Copaxone) (AT.40588) and requesting that the fine-imposing infringement ruling be annulled—see further, application A fresh appeal has been submitted before the General Court in Case T- 682/24, Red Bull and Others v Commission, brought against the Commission for failing to reimburse additional costs incurred due to the disproportionate prolongation of an inspection—see further, application NOTE—For all...

The Pensions Regulator (the Regulator) The Regulator is an arm’s-length public body set up under the Pensions Act 2004 (PeA 2004). Its authority to impose contribution notices and financial support directions appears in PeA 2004, ss 38–50. Although the Act does not use the label, these provisions are widely known as the Regulator’s ‘moral hazard’ powers. Their purpose is to counter the ‘moral hazard’ arising from the Pension Protection Fund (PPF): the possibility that corporate groups might organise their structures so as to heighten exposure within their pension schemes, comfortable that the PPF would intervene if the employer entered insolvency. The principal moral hazard tools—and the only ones exercised so far—are the power to issue a contribution notice (CN) and the power to issue a financial support direction (FSD). A CN compels the recipient to pay a specified amount into a defined benefit occupational pension scheme. A CN can be issued where the criteria in PeA 2004, s 38 are satisfied. These mechanisms exist to deter behaviour that would...

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is archived and not kept up to date. Practical implications of West Tankers In short, the current position arising from the West Tankers saga (so far) is: Any EU Member State court seised of proceedings must rule on its own jurisdiction to determine the dispute. Under Brussels I and Brussels I (recast), courts of another Member State cannot remove that competence from it. An arbitral tribunal has jurisdiction to award damages for breach of an obligation to arbitrate. Where jurisdiction is disputed (as it often is), consider advising clients to obtain a standalone final award addressing jurisdiction at the outset, and then seek to have it recognised and enforced by the court (the application would be made under the procedure set out in CPR 62). This should prevent a conflicting court judgment taking precedence, on the basis of issue estoppel. Thereafter, the parties can proceed to the liability and quantum issues within the arbitration. West Tankers—the...

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...

This Precedent includes a PowerPoint team brand workshop template with accompanying notes to help you run a session with your team to identify the key activities and values you want your business to be recognised for. It guides you and the group through sharing and refining ideas, then moves into setting concrete actions and clear next steps. 1 Meeting logistics Let the team know in advance that this will be a working session and ask them to consider how they add value to the business, arriving prepared to share their views. Have to hand paper, one pack of sticky notes per person, marker pens for everyone, and a space in the room where items can be put up on the wall. Plan for two and a half hours, including a 15-minute comfort break halfway through (based on five to ten attendees). Appoint someone in the team to help with timekeeping and to compile a list of actions, owners and timescales to capture at the end of the meeting....

This Agreement is entered into on [ date ]. Parties [ Insert name of licensor ], a company incorporated in [ England and Wales ] under number [ insert registered number ] whose registered office is at [ insert address ] (Licensor); and [ Insert name of licensee ], a company incorporated in [ England and Wales ] under number [ insert registered number ] whose registered office is at [ insert address ] (Licensee), Each of the Licensor and the Licensee is a party, and together the Licensor and the Licensee constitute the parties. Background The Licensee is [ insert details of the Licensee’s background/background to licence or relevant transaction. ] The Licensor has agreed to provide the Licensor Content to the Licensee and to grant the Licensee a licence to use the Licensor Content in accordance with the terms of this Agreement...

Introduction This concerns the acquisition by [ insert buyer name ] (the Buyer) of the [ entire share capital of [ insert name of target company ] Limited, incorporated in England and Wales under number [ insert company number ] (the Company) OR [ insert description of the business to be acquired ] (the Business) as a going concern, together with specified assets used in the Business ] from [ insert seller name ] (the Seller) (the Proposed Acquisition). This questionnaire is intended to enable the Buyer, the Buyer's solicitors, patent and trade mark attorneys, and other professional advisers to gather essential information about the IP owned and/or used by the [ Company and its subsidiaries OR Business OR which the Buyer requires to assist in the valuation of the Company OR Business and with the negotiation of the Proposed Acquisition ] . Please respond to every single question in full. Please set out your answers in italics immediately beneath each question and supply copies of all relevant documentation,...

In partnership with Alexander Stewart of Hogarth Chambers If a limited liability partnership (LLP) becomes insolvent, the preferred view is that members’ entitlements to amounts due under their capital and current accounts are subordinated to the claims of external unsecured creditors. That said, it can be contended that members’ claims for advances or loans made to the LLP—despite being entered in their current accounts—stand on the same footing as those of external unsecured creditors. LLPs are established by the Limited Liability Partnerships Act 2000 (LLPA 2000). In several respects, including insolvency, LLPs are akin to limited companies rather than partnerships; see: Limited liability partnerships (LLPs) and insolvency—overview. Where an LLP is insolvent, it is terminated by voluntary or compulsory winding-up. The winding-up regime under the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986) operates alongside LLPA 2000, s 14 and the Limited Liability Partnerships Regulations 2001 (LLPR 2001), SI 2001/1090, reg 5 and LLPR 2001, SI 2001/1090, Sch 3 (as amended)...

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...

This Q&A assumes that the trust corporation is a company incorporated and registered in the UK under the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006) CA 2006 sets the framework for how a company formed under that Act allots and issues its shares. The exact process varies by the nature of the company proposing the allotment and factors such as whether it has a single share class or several classes already in issue. For further detail, see the sub-topic: Allotment, issue and pre-emption—overview, with particular reference to the Practice Note: Allotment and issue of shares—introductory points. For guidance on the consequences of breaching the CA 2006 provisions on allotting and issuing shares, consult Practice Note: Allotment and issue of shares—penalties...