Preliminary examination meaning

Before commencing the arbitration Check limits; confirm SIAC clause; interim relief; tribunal size; proper nominations. Emergency measures Seek Emergency Arbitrator pre-constitution; urgent, Registrar-approved, binding relief. Expedited Procedure Apply pre-constitution; expect sole arbitrator, streamlined process, six‑month award. Commencing the arbitration Serve Notice on Registrar/respondent with required particulars, funding statement, fee. Responding to the arbitration Respond within 14 days; address claims, jurisdiction and counterclaims. Jurisdiction Arbitration proceeds unless screened; tribunal rules; object under Rule 31. Preliminary meeting and directions Attend administrative calls; hold early case management conference. Written statements File Claim, Defence, Counterclaim as directed; state facts, grounds, relief. Evidence Tribunal controls evidence; written testimony allowed; oral examination on request. The hearing Any party may...

Urgency requirement Recent jurisprudence underscores that patentees must move quickly once they learn, or become aware, of infringing conduct. If the patentee does not respond without delay, preliminary measures are unlikely to be granted by the court. The authorities have not been entirely uniform on how swiftly an applicant must proceed in this context. In Ortovox v Mammut (UPC_CFI_452/2023), the court concluded that, once the applicant holds all information and documentation that credibly supports a promising legal action, there is a one‑month window in which to act. By contrast, in Dyson v SharkNinja (UPC_CFI_443/2023), the allowed period was assessed as two months in which to take steps. That approach was subsequently confirmed in Hand held Products v Scandit (UPC_CFI_74/2024), where the court observed that filing the application for a preliminary injunction on the very day on which registration of unitary effect occurred made it evident that the applicant had treated the situation with the requisite urgency and had acted without delay...

In this issue: UK, EU and international regulators and bodies Prudential requirements Operational resilience Financial crime and sanctions Complaints, compensation and claims management Investigations, enforcement and discipline Regulation of benchmarks and IBOR reform Regulation of capital markets Regulation of derivatives Banks and mutuals Sustainable finance and ESG Investment funds and asset management UK MiFID II EU MiFID II Consumer credit, mortgage and home finance Regulation of insurance FSMA regulated pensions activity Payment services and systems Fintech and cryptoassets Financial Services Enforcement Database Daily and weekly news alerts Intraday news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Financial Services Highlights 2024/2025 UK, EU and international regulators and bodies Council of the European Union agrees to streamlined financial reporting and enhanced data-sharing rules for the EU financial sector The Council of the European Union and the European Parliament...

In this issue: Social care Social housing Local government finance Public procurement Governance Education Healthcare Social care Children’s social care Planning Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Social care Social care Administrative Court requests Court of Justice preliminary ruling under UK-EU Withdrawal Agreement in universal credit and domestic violence case (R (BZ) v SSWP) In R (BZ) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, the court’s focus was whether a reference to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling should be made under Article 158(1) of the Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community (WA). At paragraph [104], Mr Justice Chamberlain explained that power to seek the Court of Justice’s view on the meaning of Article 17(2) exists only where resolving that point is necessary to deliver...

The Planning Act 2008 (PA 2008) establishes the consent framework for nationally significant infrastructure projects (NSIPs) across energy, transport, water, waste water and waste. Decisions on development consent order (DCO) applications may be taken by reference to any relevant National Policy Statements (NPSs), which articulate national policy for NSIPs. See Practice Note: National Policy Statements. While the Secretary of State (SoS) is legally accountable for the decision, in practice the government entrusts acceptance and examination of applications to the Planning Inspectorate (PINS). See Practice Note: Examination of nationally significant infrastructure projects—general. The government has issued a ‘Collection: National Infrastructure Planning Guidance Portal’, containing guidance on NSIP pre-examination, the examination itself, the fast-track route for NSIPs, and awards of costs relating to the examination of DCO applications. Collectively, these provisions define the route by which nationally significant schemes are assessed and authorised, with guidance set out in practice notes and the collection. Fast-track process Under PA 2008, s 98(1), the Examining Authority (EA) must conclude examination of the application...

Adducing expert evidence in private law children proceedings This Practice Note addresses the presentation of expert evidence in private law children cases, setting out the statutory framework (in particular Part 25 of the Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010) and the associated Practice Directions) and also clarifying who qualifies as an expert. It further explores when such evidence is required, the process for seeking permission and the considerations the court must weigh when deciding that application, together with the commissioning of experts, including use of a single joint expert (SJE), and the arrangements for paying the expert’s fees. It also outlines experts’ obligations and the expectation that they attend court. In addition, it explains the need for any expert in children proceedings to satisfy the relevant national standards for experts. For hands-on guidance on evidence in private law children cases, see Practice Note: Evidence in private law children proceedings. At common law, witnesses are to testify to facts rather than opinions, unless the witness is suitably qualified to give...

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. It was originally prepared for LexisAdvance® Practical Guidance Hong Kong. Conducting a trade mark search Before filing an application to register a trade mark, it is sensible to conduct a search to see whether any identical or similar marks are already registered in Hong Kong, which assists in assessing the likelihood of successful registration. A trade mark search can prevent an applicant from incurring unnecessary application and official fees if refusal appears probable. After obtaining and reviewing the search results, the applicant may refine the mark or adopt a different mark to avoid similarity with existing registered trade marks, or to avoid objection due to inherent registrability. A trade mark search can be undertaken using the online Trade Mark Search system on the Intellectual Property Department’s website. Alternatively, the registry offers a ‘Search and Preliminary Advice’ service, which can be requested by submitting Form T1 together with the prescribed official fees: HK$400 for each...

This Precedent offers general guidance on giving evidence in employment tribunal proceedings in England and Wales, and sets out helpful, practical tips intended to make the process of giving evidence both simpler and more effective overall. Your employment lawyer will be able to give specific advice tailored precisely to your own particular circumstances and needs. Giving evidence in the employment tribunal If you are called as a witness in employment tribunal proceedings, it will typically be at the final hearing stage, or at a preliminary hearing where factual issues are to be considered. You will be expected to provide evidence for one of the parties (claimant or respondent) either in person or by video link, depending on whether the hearing is listed to take place at a tribunal venue or remotely. The tribunal can also list a hearing for in-person attendance but allow some of the evidence to be taken via video link if circumstances require it (often referred to as a hybrid hearing). In the end, an...