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 Sole traders, informal partnerships and outdated partnership deeds are common.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
Practical implications This decision explored how far a purchaser of a company can rely on an indemnity in a share sale agreement to recover from the seller for losses stemming from an employee’s negligent acts occurring both before and after the business transferred. The indemnity clause stated the seller would hold the buyer harmless for loss ‘directly or indirectly’ arising from services the company (or its agents) supplied before the transfer date, as specified in the agreement. Such wording is a common feature of share sale indemnities. On a straightforward reading, it implies that any loss linked to conduct after completion falls to the buyer, with no route to reimbursement from the seller. The core dispute was how liability should be apportioned for losses spanning pre- and post-transfer where pre-transfer negligence was left uncorrected following completion. This required analysis of two principal...
Practical implications This judgment delivers a concise overview of the relevant legal principles for a CA 2006, s 994 unfair prejudice petition and/or an alternative claim for a just and equitable winding up under IA 1986, s 122(1)(g), together with the specific criteria needed to establish such claims. For additional guidance on pursuing these claims, see Practice Notes: Unfair prejudice claim—what it is and when to use it Unfair prejudice claim—the procedure Just and equitable winding-up—what it is and when to use it Just and equitable winding-up—the procedure The key requirements for establishing a successful s 994 unfair prejudice petition Hildyard J addressed this at paras [35]–[48]. Despite a tendency to treat s 994 as covering any conduct connected with or affecting the company, and the court’s flexible, expansive approach, three cumulative requirements must be satisfied. These include: that the matters...
The Chancery Bar have confirmed that, following consultation with the Chancery Review Implementation Committee, from 1 May 2015 every unfair prejudice petition lodged in the High Court ( Rolls Building) and listed for an initial hearing before a registrar will receive automatic directions. The automatic directions are in the following form: For further guidance on unfair prejudice petitions, see Practice Notes: Unfair prejudice claim—what it is and when to use it Unfair prejudice claim—the procedure Rationale for the introduction of automatic directions in unfair prejudice petitions The move to automatic directions is being made because: in many cases, the directions ordered on the first return date are in a standard format and frequently agreed, so adopting automatic directions may... ......
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
