Featured documents
R (Greyhound Board of Great Britain Ltd) v Welsh Ministers [2026] EWHC 670 (Admin) What are the practical implications of this case? The ruling reinforces the constitutional divide between the courts and the legislature. It explains that the scheme and framework of the Government of Wales Act 2006 (GWA 2006) embody that separation of powers, and that any judicial attempt to recognise and enforce a common law obligation on Welsh Ministers to consult prior to introducing legislation in the Senedd would trespass upon that boundary. This is not a departure from established principle; case law has already upheld comparable rules for lawmakers in Scotland and at Westminster. However, this is the first express confirmation of the position for Welsh lawmakers, and the first time this dimension of the GWA 2006 has been analysed in such depth. The court examined earlier
The solution arrived through the United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC), a quasi‑judicial body handling mass claims, created under UN Security Council Resolution 687. By addressing environmental harm—most notably via its ‘F4’ claim class—the UNCC set a seminal benchmark shaping how international law and contemporary arbitral panels allocate financial responsibility for wartime ecological devastation. With present-day wars in areas such as Eastern Europe and the Middle East bringing dam breaches, strikes on chemical facilities, and the burning of farmland, the UNCC’s legacy endures as an essential reference point for states, global investors, and companies engaged in post‑conflict arbitration. The F4 claims: Quantifying the unquantifiable Prior to the 1990s, mechanisms in international law for war reparations overwhelmingly favoured property loss, foregone earnings, and bodily injury. The natural world was commonly treated as a mute, non-compensable victim of armed hostilities...
Understanding the farming business as a business Many farms still use long-standing structures that arose by habit, not strategy. Sole traders, informal partnerships and outdated partnership deeds are common. While once effective, such setups can cause major issues around succession, tax planning and involving the next generation. A corporate team can take a fresh, business-led view of the farm, asking: Who owns the land and other critical assets? Who manages daily operations? Who carries the risk and who enjoys the return? What is the enduring plan for succession? From this review, the team can confirm whether the current setup is fit for purpose or if an alternative — for example an updated partnership agreement, a company, a limited liability partnership, or a blended model — would better meet the family’s aims. Tax efficiency through joined-up advice Tax sits at the centre of most
Most recent News
In this issue Sustainable finance and ESG round-up Lending Security Shipping finance Sustainable finance Real estate finance Regulation for derivatives lawyers Sanctions Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Useful information Sustainable finance and ESG round-up— November and December 2025 This November– December 2025 Sustainable finance and ESG round-up from the Finance Group spotlights: (1) the European Parliament’s final sign-off on sustainability omnibus amendments; (2) the International Chamber of Commerce’s ratification of the Principles for Social Trade Finance and Sustainability- Linked Supply Chain Finance; and (3) the International Capital Market Association Executive Committee’s release of Climate Transition Bond guidelines. For more, see News Analysis: Sustainable finance and ESG round–up— November— December 2025. Lending The Department for Business and Trade has issued two draft statutory guidance notes on the meaning of...
Re Argentex ( Conway v Plass and others) [2025] EWHC 3125 ( Ch), [2025] EWHC 3125 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? On the Expense Question, the decision offers clear direction on when administrators may create liabilities ranking as an expense of the administration while closing out a trading book. The court confirmed that simply taking no action does not generate an expense liability. As for close out, although it required Argentex to take an affirmative step under the contractual terms (an election to close out), that act did not give rise to an expense liability. Turning to the Termination Question, the judgment addresses a significant point of contractual interpretation in the context of foreign exchange contracts, namely the circumstances in which a provider of foreign exchange services may close out a position for ‘its own...
UK developments FCA speech highlights need for clarity and higher standards in transition finance The Financial Conduct Authority has released a speech by Alicia Kedzierski, head of department in the sustainable finance division, delivered at the Loan Market Association’s Sustainable Finance Conference. Titled ‘ Raising standards in transition finance: clarity, coherence, collaboration’, it emphasises the loan market’s pivotal role in funding the UK’s move to a low‑carbon economy. Kedzierski calls for clear, consistent definitions of ‘transition finance’ and for designing transition instruments so they neither overlap with nor compete against other product categories. See: LNB News 12/11/2025 14. Sources: Raising standards in transition finance: clarity, coherence, collaboration; and The sustainability‑linked loans market – two years on. UKEF announces reinsurance agreement with Brazil and clean growth initiatives ahead of COP30 UK Export Finance has entered a reinsurance agreement with Brazil’s export credit agency, ABGF—the first...
Background As a brief reminder, after the UK’s departure from the EU on 1 February 2020, the EU– UK Withdrawal Agreement ( Withdrawal Agreement) set up a ‘transition period’ running from 1 February 2020 to 31 December 2020. Up to that point, the full corpus of EU law (including obligations arising from international agreements concluded by the EU) continued to apply in and to the UK (see Articles 2, 127(1) and 129 of the Withdrawal Agreement). The UK became subject to the Hague Choice of Court Convention on 1 October 2015 through its EU membership, as the EU approved the instrument on that date. On 28 September 2020, aiming to secure continuity after Brexit—and because Regulation ( EU) 1215/2012, Brussels ( Recast), would no longer apply to the UK once the transition ended—the UK filed an instrument to accede to the Hague Choice of Court...
Earlier this year, the decision in Macdonald Hotels v Bank of Scotland unsettled lenders and their advisers, with obiter observations intimating that, for the ‘face value’ test to be satisfied for a deed, the document, on its face, must make plain that all parties expressly intended it to operate as a deed, rather than only those executing it as a deed. That stance differs from common practice in certain finance instruments, notably intercreditor agreements, which frequently state that only specified parties execute and deliver them as deeds and, unlike security documents, are ordinarily styled as ‘agreements’ in many instances. The City of London Law Society ( CLLS) subsequently released a note expressing its view on the comments and on how to comply with the face value test, confirming that, in its opinion, there is a measure of flexibility in the ways the face value...
In this issue: National Security and Investment Act 2021 Lending Security Aviation finance Sustainable finance Debt capital markets Derivatives Regulation for derivatives lawyers Structured products and securitisation Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Useful information Banking & Finance highlights 2025/2026 National Security and Investment Act 2021 No right to full compensation after a divestment direction under the National Security and Investment Act ( R (on the application of L1T FM Holdings Ltd and Letterone Core Investments Sàrl) v Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster in the Cabinet Office). In News Analysis: No right to full compensation following divestment order under the National Security and Investment Act ( R (on the application of L1T FM Holdings Ltd and Letterone Core Investments Sàrl) v Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster in the Cabinet Office), we review the L1T FM Holdings Ltd judgment. The Court of Appeal concurred with the High Court that Article 1 of...
Houssein & others v London Credit Ltd & others [2025] EWHC 2749 ( Ch) The High Court had earlier held in 2023 that the Default Rate amounted to an unenforceable penalty. The Court of Appeal, however, concluded that the judge had misapplied the principles in Cavendish Square Holding BV v El Makdessi ( Makdessi) and sent the question back for fresh determination. Under Makdessi, the inquiry is whether a default rate serves a legitimate interest and, if so, whether the amount demanded is still extravagant, exorbitant or unconscionable. A striking aspect of the July 2020 bridging facility letter agreed between London Credit Ltd ( LCL) and CEK Investments Limited ( CEK) (the Facility Letter) was the wording of the ‘ Default Interest Provision’. It stated that, if an event of default under the facility ( Event of Default) occurred and payment was not made,...
R (on the application of L1T FM Holdings Ltd and Letterone Core Investments Sàrl) v Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster in the Cabinet Office (formerly Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy) [2025] EWCA Civ 1528 What were the practical implications of the case? In light of the recent Court of Appeal ruling in L1T FM Holdings, market participants should expect that compensation above the price realised on a forced sale is unlikely where a transaction is unwound following a divestment order under the National Security and Investment Act 2021 ( NSIA 2021). Where there is a ‘reasonable relationship of proportionality’ between the value of the asset and the compensation awarded, that suffices to meet Article 1 of Protocol 1 ( A1P1) of the European Convention of Human Rights ( ECHR), which protects property rights. This judgment sits alongside the small number of cases that...
In this issue: Property ( Digital Assets etc) Act 2025 Lending Aviation finance Shipping finance Real estate property Sustainable finance Derivatives Regulation for derivatives Regulation for banking lawyers New and updated content Useful information Property ( Digital Assets etc) Act 2025 Property ( Digital Assets etc) Act 2025 comes into force The Act clarifies which things can be recognised as objects of personal property rights, ensuring they are not excluded from such treatment. It took effect on 2 December 2025. Source: Property ( Digital Assets etc) Act 2025. Lending LMA publishes note clarifying deed requirements and intercreditor documentation The Loan Market Association ( LMA) has assessed the impact of obiter observations in Macdonald Hotels v Bank of Scotland [2025] EWHC 32 ( Comm), which raised doubt over whether a particular testimonium clause—akin to those in the LMA’s...
In this issue: Banking & Finance case round-up Lending Security Sustainable finance Debt capital markets Derivatives Regulation for derivatives lawyers Structured products and securitisation Daily and weekly news alerts Useful information Banking & Finance case round-up Banking & Finance— November 2025 case round-up See News Analysis: Banking & Finance— November 2025 case round-up for an overview of the matters flagged in Banking & Finance during November 2025. Lending R (on the application of L1T FM Holdings Ltd and Letterone Core Investments Sàrl) v Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster in the Cabinet Office (formerly Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy) [2025] EWCA Civ 1528 The Court of Appeal refused the appeal from a decision that had declined judicial review of a ‘final order’ issued under section 26(3) of the National Security and Investment Act 2021. That order...
Banking & Finance— November 2025 case round-up Westfield Park Ltd v Harworth Estates Investments Ltd [2025] EWCA Civ 1374 Interpretation of contract—deferred consideration clause The Court of Appeal upheld Westfield Park Ltd’s appeal against HHJ Klein’s ruling on the correct construction of an agreement dated 14 October 2021 (the ‘ Agreement’) for the sale and purchase of York Holiday Park Development. The key question was whether the judge at first instance had properly read a deferred consideration provision in Schedule 4 as triggering an additional payment from Westfield to Harworth Estates Investments Ltd when the Coal Authority confirmed that static caravans could be located within a ‘ Zone of Influence’ surrounding two mineshafts. The appellate court criticised the departure from the contractual wording in favour of a purposive construction of the relevant terms. It held that the judge failed to begin with the...
In this issue: Budget 2025 Lending Security Sustainable finance Debt capital markets Derivatives Structured products and securitisation Claims and remedies Daily and weekly news alerts Useful information Budget 2025 Budget 2025—key Banking & Finance announcements In the Budget 2025 on 26 November 2025, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the Rt Hon Rachel Reeves MP, outlined measures of interest to banking and finance lawyers, including the government’s emphasis on economic stability, an updated Green Financing Framework, plans for the British Business Bank, and UK listing relief. For further detail, see: Budget 2025—key Banking & Finance announcements— LNB News 26/11/2025 67. Sources: Budget 2025 and Supporting documents for Budget 2025. Lending LMA responds to FCA consultation on fund tokenisation implications for loan markets The Loan Market Association ( LMA) has filed its response to the Financial Conduct Authority ( FCA)...
In this issue: Lending Security Aviation finance Shipping finance Real estate finance Sustainable finance Debt capital markets Derivatives Structured products and securitisation Restructuring Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Latest Q& A Useful information Lending Arena Television Ltd (in liquidation) v Bank of Scotland Plc; Sentinel Broadcast Ltd (in administration) v Lloyds Bank Plc [2025] EWHC 3036 ( Comm) The court determined applications for summary judgment and for strike out in two linked actions centred on ‘ Quincecare claims’ brought by Arena Television Limited and Arena Holdings Limited (the Arena Proceedings), and by Sentinel Broadcast Ltd (the Sentinel Proceedings), against Bank of Scotland PLC and Lloyds Bank PLC. The causes of action arose out of an alleged large-scale ‘asset backed lending fraud’ ( ABL Fraud) said to have been...
Factual background The dispute concerned a set of agreements under which King Crude Carriers and others (the Buyers) agreed to acquire three vessels from Ridgebury November LLC and others (the Sellers). The parties executed three Memoranda of Agreement based on the Norwegian Saleform 2012, as amended (the MOAs). The MOAs obliged the Buyers to place a 10% deposit of the price for each vessel with a third‑party deposit holder into designated accounts shortly after those accounts were opened, and to provide all documentation required to achieve that. The Buyers failed to supply the necessary paperwork, with the result that the accounts could not be opened and no funds could be deposited. The Sellers terminated the MOAs and, invoking the Mac Kay v Dick principle, sought to recover the deposits’ value from the Buyers as a debt. The Buyers accepted breach but...
SMBC has settled its claims with AXA XL, bringing an end to the lessor's claim against the insurer, according to a High Court order dated 10 November 2025. The settlement terms have not been disclosed. On 14 November 2025, AXA XL and SMBC’s representatives did not promptly reply to any requests for public comment. In March 2024, Judge Andrew Henshaw rejected an application to pause 78 connected actions by aircraft lessors so they could proceed in Moscow. Those claims, initially estimated at roughly US$13.5bn, had been reduced to about US$9.7bn following earlier settlements at the point of that ruling. The court declined a stay amid worries that the claimants were unlikely to receive a fair hearing in Russia. The lessors are pursuing insurers, among them Allianz, AXA and Liberty Mutual, over aircraft remaining in Russia after Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. The...
From 18 November 2025, under the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 ( ECCTA 2023), compulsory identity checks will apply to all new individual directors and persons with significant control ( PSCs). There will also be a twelve‑month transition window for existing directors and PSCs to verify identity via the annual confirmation statement submission. What are the main implications for lenders? As these reforms take effect, lenders should revisit and, where necessary, update their due diligence procedures, while building additional provisions into loan and security documentation. Crucially, Companies House filings will become more complex, and any failure to comply could result in security not being validly registered at Companies House within the applicable deadline. This News Analysis examines the timetable and steps individuals must follow to verify at Companies House, the consequences of non‑compliance with the new...
In this issue: Sustainable finance and ESG round-up Lending Security Guarantees Shipping finance Sustainable finance Real estate finance Debt capital markets Derivatives Technology in banking transactions Sanctions Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Useful information Sustainable finance and ESG round-up Sustainable finance and ESG monthly round-up—7 November 2025 This month’s Finance Group update highlights: (1) the Loan Market Association’s guidance on transition loans to support a climate finance framework; (2) the International Swaps and Derivatives Association and European financial industry bodies backing the European Commission’s move to streamline the taxonomy; and (3) the United Nations Environment Programme Finance Initiative’s refreshed guidance for banks on setting climate targets. For full details, see News Analysis: Sustainable finance and ESG monthly round–up—7 November 2025. Lending Winding-up petition dismissed due to genuine and substantial dispute ( Abcor Finance Securities Ltd v Binomia Ltd) The High Court refused a winding-up petition because the alleged debt was subject to a real and material dispute. The...
This development follows the recent snapback of all nuclear‑related sanctions on Iran at UN level, after the United Nations Security Council declined to extend sanctions relief. The EU has revived its restrictive measures through six legal instruments. Four took effect on 29 September 2025: Council Decision ( CFSP) 2025/1978, Council Implementing Decision ( CFSP) 2025/1971, Council Implementing Regulation ( EU) 2025/1980 and Council Implementing Regulation ( EU) 2025/1982. The remaining two entered into force on 30 September 2025: Council Regulation ( EU) 2025/1975 and Council Decision ( CFSP) 2025/1972. Collectively, these acts reinstate measures previously adopted by the UN Security Council and transposed into EU law, alongside additional autonomous EU restrictions. These include targeted sanctions on named individuals and entities—travel bans, asset freezes and a bar on providing funds or other economic...
Abcor Finance Securities Ltd v Binomia Ltd [2025] EWHC 2374 ( Ch) What was the background? Abcor Finance Securities Ltd (the Petitioner) issued a winding-up petition against Binomia Ltd (the Company), asserting a liability of £305,811.91 pursuant to a parent company guarantee granted by the Company (the Guarantee). That Guarantee supported a loan agreement under which Abcor Finance No 2 Ltd advanced funds to the Company’s subsidiary, Circular Tech Solutions Ltd ( CTS), for the acquisition of mobile phone stock (the Loan Agreement). The Guarantee was expressed as a primary obligation, removing any need to demand payment from CTS before enforcement. Thus, upon non-payment by CTS when sums fell due under the Loan Agreement, the Petitioner could proceed immediately against the Company. CTS drew down on the facility several separate times under the Loan Agreement. The Loan Agreement stated that the facility term was ‘up to 90...
Also see: LNB News 17/09/2025 16. Instead of ring‑fencing crypto as a carve‑out dealt with via financial promotions and anti‑money laundering duties, the FCA intends to fold cryptoasset firms into the full Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 ( FSM 2000) framework. In practice, the FCA would normalise crypto by delivering like‑for‑like treatment for comparable risks, regardless of the technology. The article is set around four pillars: governance and accountability; market access and distribution; operational resilience and financial crime; and product and disclosure strategy. For businesses that have only sat within the Money Laundering Regulations ( MLRs) boundary and the financial promotions regime, this shift brings a clear step‑up in oversight, responsibility and cost. Fundamentally, the consultation maps the FCA’s existing regulatory blueprint onto cryptoasset activities. That spans high‑level standards such as operational resilience and the Senior Managers and Certification Regime ( SM& CR); business...
Popular documents
When evaluating a general damages claim, the practitioner ought initially to refer to the Judicial College Guidelines (JCG)...
This Practice Note This Practice Note reviews mechanisms used in settling litigation. A Tomlin order consists of a consent order paired with a schedule. It operates to stay proceedings on terms that have been agreed. The provisions contained in the schedule may remain confidential. This Practice Note describes the scope of confidentiality attaching to the schedule and sets out how it differs from a standard consent order. Sample wording for a Tomlin order is included, alongside links to precedents, as well as guidance on court approval. It also addresses varying, setting aside and enforcing a Tomlin order, including the considerations the court will take into account when handling applications for each. Further guidance is provided on interpreting and applying the relevant provisions of the CPR; however, some courts and divisions impose very specific requirements for both drafting and approval, and for approaching the schedule and confidentiality issues. Accordingly, you must consider the particular rules and court guide provisions in the forum where your claim is proceeding when drawing up the Tomlin order...
Date [ date ] Parties [ name of Landlord ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Landlord) [ name of Tenant ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Tenant) [ [ name of Guarantor ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Guarantor) ] [ [ name of Mortgagee ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Mortgagee) ] Definitions Within this Deed, the terms below shall be interpreted as follows: [ Annual Rent • the annual sum reserved under the Lease; ] [ Insurance Rent • the Tenant’s share of the Landlord’s costs of insuring the Property (as set out in the Lease); ] Lease • the lease of the Property dated [ date ], entered into between (1) [ the Landlord OR [ name ...
I, [ name ], of [ address ], solemnly and sincerely state that: [ Matters to be verified, set out in numbered paragraphs ] I make this solemn statement in good conscience, believing it to be true, and pursuant to the provisions of the Statutory Declarations Act 1835. DECLARED at [ details ] this [ day ] day of [ month and year ] Before me ................................................................................ [ signature of the person before whom the declaration is made ] A [ commissioner for oaths OR [ solicitor OR [ insert other qualification ] ] authorised to administer oaths ]...
Discover more from LexisNexis
