Stop order meaning

STOP PRESS: The Financial Remedies Guide 2026, released on 13 March 2026 by Mr Justice Peel (National Lead Judge of the Financial Remedies Court) and His Honour Judge Hess (Deputy National Lead Judge of the Financial Remedies Court), and approved by the President of the Family Division, now replaces and supersedes: the Statement on the efficient conduct of financial remedy cases assigned to a High Court judge, whether heard at the Royal Courts of Justice or elsewhere (1 February 2016) (the High Court judge level efficiency statement) the Statement on the efficient conduct of financial remedy hearings in the Financial Remedies Court below High Court judge level (11 January 2022) (the below High Court judge level efficiency statement) the Financial Remedies Court Primary Principles document (11 January 2022) the Notice from the Financial Remedies Court: electronic bundles (19 April 2022) the Allocation of financial remedies cases to High Court judge level (21 May 2024) This document is being updated...

Stop Press: On 31 March 2026, the President of the Family Division, Sir Andrew McFarlane, released consolidated guidance on allocation and gatekeeping for children proceedings in the Family Court, coming into force on 5 May 2026. This replaces the 2014 public and private law guidance and establishes a single framework for allocation across all children cases. It clarifies the functions of gatekeeping teams, aligns allocation choices with contemporary procedural pathways (including Child Focused Courts), and underscores key principles of judicial continuity, proportionality and the efficient deployment of judicial resources, see News Analysis: Consolidated allocation and gatekeeping guidance for children proceedings issued. This Procedural Guide is presently being revised to align with the President’s guidance. It outlines the procedure for applications under section 8 of the Children Act 1989 for a specific issue order to resolve a particular question connected with parental responsibility, or a prohibited steps order limiting the exercise of parental responsibility in a defined respect. It also details who may apply, pre-action obligations, the principles the...

This Checklist outlines the principal legal and practical issues to consider when undertaking planning due diligence in Scotland to confirm a site’s precise planning status. It includes reviewing the planning application record, deciding between a limited or comprehensive report, pinpointing which permissions have been lawfully implemented, and evaluating the scope of authorised development. It also deals with breaches of conditions or planning control, reporting on the extent and current legal standing of consents, verifying any enforcement measures, and considering whether a breach is immune from action. This sits within a wider suite of Scottish planning guidance; see: Planning for property lawyers in Scotland-collection. Importance of establishing the planning history of a site In property deals involving the creation, purchase or sale of interests in land, establishing the legality of any existing or intended uses or operational development on that land is essential. This is because planning permission is required for the ‘development’ of land as defined in section 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997...

In this issue Equality and human rights Judicial review Information law International law Other public law news Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Useful information Equality and human rights Supreme Court rules on first Russia sanctions challenge (Shvidler v Foreign Secretary) The Supreme Court concluded, by a 4–1 majority, that the sanctions applied by the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs to Mr Shvidler, and, unanimously, that the actions taken by the Secretary of State for Transport against the yacht M/Y Phi owned by Dalston Projects, introduced immediately after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, were proportionate and lawful notwithstanding the recognised impact on the appellants’ rights under the European Convention on Human Rights. In a robust dissent, Lord Leggatt criticised the majority’s stance in Mr Shvidler’s appeal, holding that the measures against him, as a UK national, were disproportionate and thus unlawful. With...

In this issue: Governance Planning Social housing Children’s social care Social care Healthcare Education Environmental law and climate change Local government finance Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Governance Equality Act 2010 provisions refer to biological sex, regardless of gender recognition certificate (For Women Scotland v Scottish Ministers) The Supreme Court ruled that, within the Equality Act 2010 (EqA 2010), the words ‘man’, ‘woman’ and ‘sex’ denote biological sex. Treating the relevant provisions as embracing ‘certificated sex’ by virtue of a gender recognition certificate (GRC) would render them incoherent and unworkable, and thus cannot be done. For sex discrimination claims, an individual has the protected characteristic of biological sex only. The relevant parts of the EqA 2010 fall within section 9(3) of the Gender Recognition Act 2004 (GRA 2004), and so displace the section 9(1) rule that a person with a GRC is, for all purposes, of the acquired...

In this issue: Copyright & associated rights Designs Trade marks/passing off Patents Geographical indications IP and technology Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Useful information Copyright & associated rights Law360 reports that Sony Music has again failed to shut down a copyright claim in England relating to royalties from Jimi Hendrix’s band. A judge in London concluded the bandmates’ estates present an arguable case concerning IP rights tied to music streaming platforms. See: Sony loses bid to stop Hendrix Bandmates' Copyright Trial. Copyright and Performances (Application to Other Countries) (Amendment) Order 2024 SI 2024/193: This instrument widens eligibility for specified rights under UK copyright law to certain non-UK nationals by lifting some of the current limitations on extending those rights abroad. The Order takes effect on the date the CPTPP becomes operative for the UK. See: LNB News 28/02/2024 29...

ARCHIVED This archived Practice note reviews the clawback of business investment relief (BIR), the remittance relief for investment into UK companies. It covers: extraction of value how to avoid a chargeable remittance after a potentially chargeable event the order in which disposals are treated the interaction with the mixed funds rules the capital gains tax (CGT) position STOP PRESS: Abolition of non-dom regime and introduction of residence-based IHT regime The Finance Act 2025 (FA 2025), which received Royal Assent on 20 March 2025, legislates to abolish the remittance basis of taxation and introduce a residence-based regime from 6 April 2025. FA 2025 also replaces domicile as the key criterion for inheritance tax liability. Additional changes include amendments to the excluded property rules, removal of protected settlements status for offshore trusts, and revisions to overseas workday relief. For details on these reforms, see Practice Notes: The abolition of the remittance basis of taxation from 2025–26 and A new residence-based...

Interim ‘springboard’ injunctions This Practice Note examines the character and reach of interim ‘springboard’ injunctions, deployed to stop a transgressor securing an unfair competitive advantage arising from unlawful conduct. It addresses the particular circumstances in which an employer may seek a springboard injunction to curb the actions of a former employee, the evidential requirements that must be met to obtain the order, and the means by which protection is delivered in practice. It also considers how the length and breadth of the injunction can be confined and tailored. On occasion, an employer will pursue an injunction to shield themselves from the conduct of a former employee who, before employment ended, breached a post-termination restriction (restrictive covenant) or misused the employer’s confidential information and, by that misuse, gained an unfair competitive advantage over their former employer. An interim order intended to neutralise any unfair competitive advantage that might be obtained through misuse of an employer’s confidential information, breach of contract, or the commission of a tort, is commonly called...

Introduction The Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) is a charge applied to development. Its statutory foundation lies in Part 11 of the Planning Act 2008 (PA 2008), which permits the Secretary of State to make regulations providing for the imposition of CIL. That power was exercised through the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010, SI 2010/948 (the CIL Regulations). CIL operates in both England and Wales. It is set by ‘charging authorities’ for certain development of land within their areas and is collected by ‘collecting authorities’. For further detail on charging and collecting authorities, and the circumstances in which CIL becomes payable on development, see Practice Note: Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL)—who administers CIL, when does CIL arise, and when and by whom must CIL be paid. The CIL Regulations also include enforcement mechanisms, allowing collecting authorities to levy a range of surcharges, issue stop notices, and, where necessary, recover monies through appropriate legal action. Collection and enforcement procedures are supported by a right to appeal specified decisions (see Practice Note:...

STOP PRESS: THE NEW ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS CODE CAME INTO FORCE ON 28 DECEMBER 2017. This precedent was prepared against the backdrop of the former Code, and its substance may still be pertinent for the transitional arrangements contained in the new Code. It remains useful context. The transitional arrangements in the new Code, set out in Schedule 2 to the Digital Economy Act 2017, state that existing agreements under the former Code (ie an agreement under paragraph 2 or 3, or a court order conferring Code rights under paragraph 5 of the former Code) will continue to have effect once the new Code commences, albeit with certain modifications. For added detail on the transitional arrangements, see: New Electronic Communications Code—Code rights—Transitional provisions (Schedule 2 DEA 2017). For further information regarding the new Code, please consult Practice Notes: New Electronic Communications Code—Code rights and New Electronic Communications Code—terminating and modifying Code rights. The City of London Law Society published a new Digital Fixed Line Infrastructure Agreement for the New Electronic Communications...

Closure Application Notice ARCHIVED: This Precedent is archived and is no longer maintained...

STOP PRESS: The Financial Remedies Guide 2026, released on 13 March 2026 by Mr Justice Peel (National Lead Judge of the Financial Remedies Court) and His Honour Judge Hess (Deputy National Lead Judge of the Financial Remedies Court), with the President of the Family Division’s approval, now replaces and supersedes the following: the Statement on the efficient conduct of financial remedy cases allocated to a High Court judge whether sitting at the Royal Courts of Justice or elsewhere (1 February 2016) (the High Court judge level efficiency statement) the Statement on the efficient conduct of financial remedy hearings proceeding in the Financial Remedies Court below High Court judge level (11 January 2022) (the below High Court judge level efficiency statement) the Financial Remedies Court Primary Principles document (11 January 2022) the Notice from the Financial Remedies Court: electronic bundles (19 April 2022) the Allocation of financial remedies cases to High Court judge level (21 May 2024) This document is...