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 Sole traders, informal partnerships and outdated partnership deeds are common.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
What are the practical implications of this case? Inter Digital Inc and other companies v Optis Cellular Technology LLC and others [2025] EWCA Civ 1263 delivers clear direction for those engaged in patent litigation, extending to third parties with a stake in confidential material at issue. Notably, it was the non-parties—rather than Apple and Optis—who sought permission to appeal the High Court decision. The court’s acknowledgement of third-party rights may prompt greater participation by non-party stakeholders where disputes turn on third party licences. By backing a single approach to redactions and outlining how factual mistakes can be corrected, the court has sharpened understanding of the treatment of confidential information in UK proceedings. Even so, the judgment stresses that any departure from open justice must be exceptional and justified by compelling reasons, so applicants must articulate and justify their proposals. Citing his reasoning in Unwired Planet v...
In this issue: Advertising, marketing and sponsorship Contracts Data protection International Supply chain Lex Talk®Commercial: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Advertising, marketing and sponsorship ASA rulings—5 November 2025 The Advertising Standards Authority ( ASA) received a single complaint about advertising by On The Beach Ltd, which stated that customers booking particular holidays would be given free access to airport lounges. The ASA upheld the complaint. See: LNB News 05/11/2025 27... Contracts Ms Amlin Marine NV (on behalf of Ms Amlin Syndicate AML/2001) v King Trader Ltd [2025] EWCA Civ 1387 The Court of Appeal ( Civil Division) dismissed the appellants’ challenge and confirmed that a ‘pay first’ clause in a marine insurance policy was enforceable against the Charterer. The policy had been issued by MS Amlin Marine NV to...
In this issue: Advertising, marketing and sponsorship Contracts International Public procurement Supply chain Supply of services Lex Talk®Commercial: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Advertising, marketing and sponsorship The Advertising Standards Authority ( ASA) has confirmed that the Committee of Advertising Practice ( CAP) and the Broadcast Committee of Advertising Practice ( BCAP) will delete energy labelling requirements from their Codes and related guidance following a review and public consultation. The rules being withdrawn are CAP Code 11.8 and 11.9, and BCAP Code 9.9 and 9.10, which were added in 2011 to align with legal obligations to include energy labels and product fiche details in specified ads. CAP and BCAP consulted from 3 February to 4 March 2025 and received no...
In this issue: Advertising, marketing and sponsorship Consumer protection Contracts E-commerce Public procurement Supply of goods and services Lex Talk®Commercial: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Advertising, marketing and sponsorship ASA rulings—22 October 2025 A single complaint to the Advertising Standards Authority ( ASA) targeted a social media post from Eaton Gate Gaming Ltd, trading as Kwiff, that showed Sir Lewis Hamilton. It was also claimed the post featured a person with pronounced appeal to under-18s, contrary to the CAP Code. The ASA therefore upheld the complaint. See: LNB News 22/10/2025 17. CMA closes Google Privacy Sandbox investigation and releases binding commitments The Competition and Markets Authority ( CMA) examined Google’s plan to phase out third-party cookies in Chrome and to roll out ‘ Privacy Sandbox’ solutions. Opened on 7 January 2021 under Chapter II of the Competition Act 1998, the probe considered whether the proposals could unduly favour...
Kulkarni v Gwent Holdings Ltd [2025] EWCA Civ 1206 Factual background The dispute sprang from the dealings between Mr Kulkarni and Gwent Holdings Ltd, each a shareholder in a private hospital company and party to a shareholders’ agreement concerning it (the ‘ SHA’). Although the SHA recorded both Mr Kulkarni and Gwent as holding substantial stakes, in truth Mr Kulkarni owned only a single share, owing to peculiarities in the regulatory regime governing the private healthcare sector. Those recorded holdings did not reflect the operational realities mandated by regulation. Relations collapsed during the coronavirus ( Covid-19) pandemic, culminating in Gwent causing the company to: allot to Gwent the shares attributed to Mr Kulkarni under the SHA, together with further newly issued shares; assert termination of the SHA; and decline to recognise the appointment of a director whom Mr Kulkarni was entitled to...
Advanced Multi- Technology for Medical Industry (trading as Hitex) & others v Uniserve Ltd [2025] EWCA Civ 1212 What are the practical implications of this case? This ruling is a pointed reminder of the risks that flow from a hesitant or ambiguous reaction to anticipatory breaches. An unlawful notice of termination can be seized upon by the other contracting party as an anticipatory repudiatory breach, thereby bringing the agreement to an end and opening the door to a claim for damages. Conversely, if that party elects not to treat the breach as discharging the contract, the contract persists and remains enforceable, with performance required from both sides. The Court of Appeal underscored that there is no halfway house: a party cannot purport to keep a bargain alive while withholding its own performance under it. The judgment is also significant because the Court of Appeal held that the...
In this issue: Advertising, marketing and sponsorship Contracts E-commerce Supply chain Lex Talk®Commercial: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Advertising, marketing and sponsorship CAP and BCAP update guidance on under-18s protection in gambling advertising The Committee of Advertising Practice ( CAP) and the Broadcast Committee of Advertising Practice ( BCAP) have refreshed their guidance on safeguarding under-18s in gambling and lottery advertising. The revision draws on three years of applying the ‘strong appeal’ test, introduced in 2022 to replace the earlier ‘particular appeal’ benchmark for material likely to draw undue attention from under-18s. Notable changes clarify social media audience thresholds, confirming that a combined total of at least 100,000 follower accounts registered to under-18s across platforms is indicative of strong appeal to minors. A new Context...
Alaska Airlines Inc v Virgin Aviation TM Ltd and another company [2025] EWHC 2505 ( Comm) What are the practical implications of this case? The principal outcomes of Mr Justice Foxton’s analysis can be stated as follows: Where an unjust enrichment claim founded on failure of basis is invoked to stop payment of a contractual amount, the correct characterisation is that this engages the defence of circuity of action (para [49]). In that scenario, circuity of action does not mean the debt is never due; rather, it supplies a defence to liability. A broadly drafted no set off clause captures such a defence, so summary judgment can be granted (para [52]). To reach those conclusions, Foxton J reviewed a range of authorities in which no set off provisions were relied upon (see especially para [47]), and he also considered and clarified other...
Cyber resilience needs to be built in from the very start, not bolted on after terms are settled. Bringing legal teams into procurement at an early stage allows organisations to set expectations before contracts are concluded, ensuring protections are workable, clear and aligned to supplier practice. This early involvement reduces the likelihood of retrofitting clauses and promotes more integrated risk management. Before the contract lay the groundwork early Effective resilience planning should start before the contract is signed. Legal teams should collaborate with stakeholders to evaluate: applicable laws and frameworks by sector and service where the solution sits within the wider business ecosystem how it connects to other systems—connectivity can pose greater risk than criticality the supplier’s visibility of its own supply chain, including indirect dependencies who holds responsibility for different layers of technology, particularly in cloud...
What is the failure to prevent fraud offence? The FTPF offence, in force from 1 September 2025, marks a major widening of corporate criminal exposure. Departing from classic corporate fraud cases that hinge on proving senior management’s awareness or participation, this route imposes liability on a ‘failure to prevent’ basis. Large organisations—those satisfying any two of: over 250 staff, turnover above £36m, or total assets exceeding £18m—can be prosecuted where an employee, agent, subsidiary, or other ‘associated person’ commits fraud to benefit the organisation. The sole defence is to show that the organisation had reasonable anti-fraud procedures in place. How does the FTPF offence relate to greenwashing? Its relevance to greenwashing emerges from the offences it captures. The regime covers fraud by false representation (section 2 of the Fraud Act 2006 ( Fr A 2006)), fraud by failing to disclose information ( Fr A 2006, s 3), and...
In this issue: Advertising, marketing and sponsorship Consumer protection Contracts E-commerce Sale and supply of goods Lex Talk®Commercial: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Latest Q& As Advertising, marketing and sponsorship HFSS promotion, placement and advertising—where are we now? In recent years the government has rolled out measures intended to curb the promotion, positioning and advertising of food and drink high in fat, salt or sugar ( HFSS). The objective is to address childhood obesity and put children’s health first by limiting children’s exposure to HFSS products in physical retail, on TV and online. While part of the regime is already operative, other elements have been deferred owing to factors such as rising food prices and cost of living pressures. In this article, Simon Jupp and Emma Sims of Taylor Wessing summarise the rules and confirm their status as at September 2025. See News...
Tresoldi v Amazon EU Sàrl , case number KB-2025-002852 Claim issued against Amazon in the UK A consumer injured by a power tool bought on Amazon Marketplace has brought what has been characterised as a ‘first of its kind’ claim against an online marketplace in the UK. The case contends that the tool—referenced in a 2023 Office for Product Safety and Standards ( OPSS) product safety report—was defective under CPA 1987. It is also said the claimant pursued breaches of contractual terms concerning satisfactory quality and fitness for purpose. Reports indicate the product was purchased before the OPSS safety alert, and the claimant sustained a finger injury in September 2022 that required partial amputation. Under CPA 1987, a person suffering personal injury caused wholly or in part by a defective product may seek compensation from: the producer of the product; an...
In this issue: Advertising, marketing and sponsorship Agency and distribution Consumer protection Contracts International Lex Talk®Commercial: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Latest Q& A Advertising, marketing and sponsorship ASA rulings—1 October 2025 The Advertising Standards Authority ( ASA) reviewed a grievance about statements by BCCR Ltd concerning ‘ Belief Coding Cognitive Rewiring’. The issue centred on misleading health claims and the discouragement of vital medical care. The ASA upheld the case. See: LNB News 01/10/2025 26. CAP and BCAP launch ASA consultation on unhealthy food advertising restrictions The Committee of Advertising Practice ( CAP) and the Broadcast Committee of Advertising Practice ( BCAP) have opened, for the ASA, a consultation on delivering new advertising limits for less healthy food and drink. It seeks views on...
Overriding principles The DMCC’s core requirement is that a product’s “total price” must be shown prominently in every invitation to purchase ( ITP). ( For what constitutes an ITP, see here.) The total price covers all amounts the consumer will inevitably pay, which therefore includes any compulsory delivery charges. There is a limited DMCC exception. Where, owing to the nature of the product, a compulsory delivery charge cannot reasonably be worked out in advance, every ITP must explain how that charge will be calculated. This explanation must appear with the same prominence as the total price and must enable the consumer to determine the overall cost. Typically, equal prominence means placing this information beside or immediately below the total price. Before relying on this carve‑out, traders should be satisfied that the compulsory delivery charge genuinely cannot be calculated beforehand. The CMA has indicated that the...
In this issue: Advertising, marketing and sponsorship Agency and distribution Contracts Intellectual property International Public procurement Sale and supply of goods Lex Talk®Commercial: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Advertising, marketing and sponsorship ASA rulings—24 September 2025 The Advertising Standards Authority ( ASA) examined complaints concerning three adverts promoting group litigation. On 24 September 2025, it delivered three decisions, each upholding the complaints. See: LNB News 24/09/2025 40. DBT updates Price Marking Order 2004 guidance The Department for Business and Trade ( DBT) has issued updated guidance on the Price Marking Order 2004, SI 2004/102, revising the meanings of ‘selling price’ and ‘unit price’, and adding a fresh definition for ‘deposit’. It also introduces Article 7A, which obliges retailers to present multiple selling...
Background The Late Payment of Commercial Debts ( Interest) Act 1998 ( LPCD( I) A 1998) is the principal piece of legislation dealing with late payment. Under LPCD( I) A 1998, creditors have a statutory entitlement to interest at 8% above the Bank of England Bank Rate, a fixed charge, and reasonable recovery costs where payment is overdue. Its application is restricted to business-to-business contracts for goods or services, and parties often query whether particular agreements or sums come within its scope. It is possible to contract out of LPCD( I) A 1998, but only where the contract supplies an alternative, substantial contractual remedy for late payments. There is cross-party political agreement that existing measures protecting SMEs from late payments are lacking and impede SME growth: the Starmer Government aims to reinforce protections by taking eight key legislative steps to deliver ‘the toughest laws on late...
News Analysis: UK product liability reform—new redress rules for AI systems? We recently discussed the likelihood of forthcoming changes to the UK product liability framework (see News Analysis: UK product liability reform—new redress rules for AI systems?), which could result in the UK’s product liability regime being brought into closer alignment with the new EU Product Liability Directive (the Revised EU PLD—see Practice Note: The Revised EU Product Liability Directive). The Law Commission has since confirmed a formal review of the UK’s product liability regime within its 14th work programme. For now, the apparent emphasis of that review is on ‘emerging technologies’, with a particular spotlight on AI......
In this issue: Advertising, marketing and sponsorship Contracts Data protection E-commerce International Lex Talk®Commercial: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Advertising, marketing and sponsorship DHSC publishes response and lays finalised brand advertising exemption regulations before Parliament The Department of Health and Social Care ( DHSC) has issued the government’s reply to the consultation on the Advertising ( Less Healthy Food and Drink) ( Brand Advertising Exemption) Regulations 2025, SI 2025/1011, and placed the instrument and explanatory memorandum before Parliament. The rules introduce a carve‑out for brand advertising from the restrictions on promoting less healthy food and drink on television and online. They aim to reduce children’s exposure to less healthy products, supporting the government’s drive to tackle childhood obesity. The measures are set to apply UK‑wide from 5 January 2026, with...
Trans Trade RK SA v State Food and Grain Corporation of Ukraine [2025] EWHC 1803 ( Comm) The Commercial Court overturned three GAFTA Appeal Awards and affirmed the correct construction of section 49(2) of the Sale of Goods Act 1979. In GAFTA arbitrations, the Sellers pursued the contract price for goods left unpaid. The Buyers resisted on two bases, both of which failed before GAFTA, namely: that the Contracts had been frustrated; and that the Sellers could not sue for the unpaid price. The Buyers then appealed the awards to the Commercial Court under section 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996. A central provision common to all three Contracts was clause 6.1, which stated that the Buyer must pay, by bank transfer on a CAD (cash against documents) basis, 100% of the value of the portion of the Goods delivered, in...
In this issue: Advertising, marketing and sponsorship Consumer protection Contracts E-commerce International Sale and supply of goods Supply of services Lex Talk®Commercial: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Latest Q& A Advertising, marketing and sponsorship ASA Rulings—10 September 2025 The Advertising Standards Authority upheld two complaints about alcohol promotions, forming part of a wider focus on alcohol advertising. The decisions followed investigations prompted by the ASA’s Active Ad Monitoring system, which applies AI to spot potentially non-compliant online ads. See: LNB News 10/09/2025 14. Consumer protection CMA publishes guidance for online review sites on compliance with consumer law The Competition and Markets Authority has issued new guidance for businesses that host online reviews, explaining how to comply with consumer protection law. It emphasises publishing all authentic, relevant and lawful...
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
