Protective award meaning

SRCL Ltd v National Health Service Commissioning Board (also known as NHS England) [2018] EWHC 1985 (TCC) What are the practical implications of this case? The court delivered a series of significant observations that merit close attention across multiple aspects of the dispute. On procedure, it highlighted the centrality of agreed lists of issues, stating that a List of Agreed Issues is an essential device in contemporary litigation, not just in the specialist courts but across the High Court. The court was distinctly unimpressed by SRCL’s effort to advance a new contention at trial that had not appeared on the agreed list, determining that parties should be bound by what they have settled in that list rather than treating it as merely indicative. As to limitation, the judgment demonstrates that the short time limits under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 SI 2015/102 (PCR 2015), reg 92, will be applied strictly—the court emphasised that parties ought to be ready to issue protective proceedings, and may even need to commence claims...

In this issue: Practice and procedure Public children Private children Financial provision International children Daily and weekly news alerts Updated content Useful information Practice and procedure OPRC opens consultation on inaugural Online Procedure Rules under the 2022 Act The Online Procedure Rule Committee (OPRC) is consulting on the first Online Procedure Rules to be made under the Judicial Review and Courts Act 2022. The draft Online Procedure (Core Rules and Pilot Schemes) Rules 2026 are designed to oversee online proceedings across the civil, family and tribunals jurisdictions. At first, coverage will be limited to possession proceedings, with a view to extending to all proceedings within the scope of the Online Procedure Rules in due course. The consultation closes on 15 January 2026. Responses can be submitted online or sent by email to oprcconsultations@justice.gov.uk. See: LNB News 05/12/2025 25. Public children Relocation and protective orders (Somerset Council v The Mother and others) In...

Key features of the SIAC Rules 2025 The SIAC Rules 2025 present a wide array of procedural mechanisms that users can tailor to what best serves their particular dispute. These comprise: Emergency arbitration to secure urgent interim or conservatory measures before the tribunal is formed, together with a newly introduced ability to seek a ‘protective preliminary order’ without prior notice to the other parties Streamlined and expedited procedures for lower-value claims, employing a simplified arbitration process and a sole arbitrator Options for consolidation of arbitrations and joinder of parties A newly added facility to coordinate arbitrations, where the same tribunal is consolidated and there is a common question of law or fact The tribunal is also vested with extensive powers to promote a fair, swift, and cost‑effective resolution of the dispute and to support the enforceability of the award...

This Practice Note has been prepared in collaboration with Ms Koh Swee Yen, Senior Counsel and Partner, Mr Joel Quek, Partner, Ms Magdalene Ong, Partner, Ms Divya Harchandani, Foreign Lawyer, and Ms Thea Elyssa Vega, Foreign Lawyer, all from WongPartnership LLP, Singapore. The seventh edition of the SIAC Rules took effect on 1 January 2025 and can be accessed here. This note addresses how to initiate arbitration under the Arbitration Rules of the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) (7th edition) 2025 (the 2025 SIAC Rules). Please note that Singapore judgments mentioned in this Practice Note are not reported by LexisNexis® UK. Prior to commencing an arbitration Before beginning an arbitration, there must be a ‘dispute’ that is capable of referral to arbitration. At the outset, assess whether an arbitration agreement exists and whether there is a ‘dispute’ that may properly be referred to arbitration. Consider as well any additional jurisdictional objections a respondent might advance. The following matters should be reviewed prior to starting any arbitration (among others):...

The importance of interim measures A party engaged in international commercial arbitration may require interim relief to preserve the status quo or otherwise safeguard its position. Such protection can be essential at any point in the arbitral proceedings. Although a core tenet of international arbitration is that parties should avoid conduct that could prejudice enforcement of the final award or inflame or prolong the dispute, that principle offers little reassurance to an applicant confronting a respondent determined to act, before, during, or after the arbitration, in a manner ultimately harmful to the applicant. Hence, the authority of courts and tribunals to order interim protective measures in support of arbitration is of fundamental significance. The British Virgin Islands (BVI) Arbitration Act 2013 (the BVI Act) sets out a coherent framework for granting interim measures, empowering both arbitrators and the court to implement the necessary steps. The BVI Act substantially mirrors article 17 of the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration (the Model Law), albeit with notable departures—see Practice Note:...

Court of Appeal—professional negligence ARCHIVED : This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. The Court of Appeal upheld an appeal in a claim against solicitors, holding that the loss of a chance head of damage was too remote. At first instance, the judge concluded that Lewis Silkin LLP had fallen below the required standard by not advising their client to include a jurisdiction provision in his employment agreement with a franchisee involved in the Indian Premier League’s Twenty20 competition. Because no jurisdiction clause appeared in the contract, when the client later issued proceedings against the franchisee over a severance entitlement, he faced jurisdictional challenges (ultimately dismissed) brought by the franchisee, which postponed his obtaining judgment for £10 million in severance. The client’s case was that, with proper advice on jurisdiction, the contract would have contained an exclusive jurisdiction clause. On that footing, he said, he would have secured judgment for the severance sum sooner (as there would have been no hold‑ups arising from jurisdiction objections) and...

[ Insert in para 8.2 of claim form ET1: ] The [ insert name of union ] is an autonomous trade union recognised by the Respondent in relation to [ insert particulars of the affected bargaining unit for which the union is recognised, e.g. all hourly‑paid workers at its factory in Cardiff ]. [ Insert particulars of the dismissals. Example wording is provided at paragraphs 2 to 3 below ]...

[ Insert in para 8.2 of claim form ET1: ] Following a decision dated [ insert date ], an Employment Tribunal convened at [ insert place ] issued a protective award concerning [ hourly paid workers ] [ who had been dismissed by the Respondent OR whom the Respondent proposed to dismiss ] as redundant during the period from [ insert date ] to [ insert date ], requiring the Respondent to pay remuneration for a protected period of [ 30 ] days from [ insert date ] to [ insert date ]. The Claimant is an hourly‑paid worker to whom that protective award applies. [ His OR Her OR Their ] weekly pay is £[ insert figure ], and the remuneration to which [ he OR she OR they ] [ is OR are ] entitled under the award amounts to £[ insert figure ]. The Respondent has [ failed to pay the Claimant any of the sum due OR paid only part of...

[ Insert in para 6.1 of response form ET3: ] It is [ admitted OR not admitted OR denied ] that the Claimant is an independent trade union acknowledged by the Respondent in respect of [ insert particulars of the relevant bargaining unit for which the union is recognised, eg all hourly-paid employees at its plant in Cardiff ]. [ Insert a reply to the particulars of the dismissals stated in the claim. Sample text is provided at paragraphs 2 to 3 below...]